On balance capitalism is a better system for mankind then Communism

There is much I wish to say, and little room to say it. I will spend this round presenting some arguments, and will begin my rebuttals next round, as well as further develop some of the ideas presented here.Communism - A PrimerTo truly understand this debate, one must first understand what Communism is. In most people's eyes, it is no doubt visions of the iron curtain, and of starving people, lined up at the street corner for a loaf of bread. It is the mass executions, and the state-headed oppression of free ideas. The numerous crimes of the 20th Century.But this was not Communism, despite what you have been told. This was a form of State Socialism (and I use the term 'Socialism' very loosely), nothing more. These countries were supposed transitional stages into Communism. There were not Communism itself.So what is Communism then? One can think of hunter-gatherer tribes to gain an understanding. Indeed, such societies have even been called "Primitive Communism" by Karl Marx. The idea is of a society which has no sate, nor socio-economic classes. A society where individuals do not claim "private ownership" over land or items, and where the means of production are collectively owned, instead of privately owned, in the hands of private individuals (Capitalists).Now, one may take this to mean that Communism is against individualism, and while it is true Communism is a collectivist society of a sorts, it is not against individualism, and in fact, is a far more individualistic society than any Capitalist one. This is because, under Capitalist society, most members of society are not truly free. They are subject to the whim of the market, the whim of the ruling class, and the whim of the state (More on this later). Communism, by comparison, seeks to create a society where individuals are no longer estranged from their labour, and are free to pursue whatever their passions may be. Communism seeks to create a society where economics no longer determines the fate of people, and where alienated labour ceases to exist. This idea is encompassed in the popular slogan "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Contribute what you like, and receive what you need.Capitalism - A PrimerNow, my opponent has given a short few sentences on Capitalism, but they do not do the system justice, and are far too simplistic in their description, as well as inaccurate. Capitalism is not a voluntary exchange between individuals. It is a necessary exchange. There is no choice in Capitalism, whether or not you will play by it's rules. If you do not trade, you will starve, and you will die. What Capitalism is, is a system in which a select few individuals hold "ownership" over the means of production (factories, tools, and other non-human elements of production), and a great many individuals, work for these people, and receive as payment, a portion of the value they create through their labour. The point of Capitalism is to create a system wherein people are motivated by profit; making more money, and increasing your wealth.Wage-SlaveryCapitalism is a system of economic exploitation. The most basic way to understand this, is to understand what it means to make profit. Let us presume that you, a worker, produce an object worth $20. You have just done $20 worth of labour. With this in mind, if one sells the object for it's value, you will not make profit, but will "break even". So how does one generate profit? There are two means. (1) Workers are paid less then the value of their labour, and/or (2) you charge the consumer for more than the object is worth. In both scenarios, someone is being ripped off. Exploited. Most often, the former is what occurs, due to it being intrinsically easier. For what can the worker do? They need money, and they do not own the means of production. All they have is their own labour power. They are at the mercy of their employer.Now you may often hear the term "wage-slavery" tossed around Marxist circles. The idea of the term has it's foundlings in Marx's 'Das Kapital', wherein Marx discusses various kinds of societies. Throughout all human history, in every society that has ever existed, there is a question that occurs that must be solved. In every society, there are those that use their minds and body to transform the land in useful or enjoyable ways (they do work) and there are those who do not. Who is it that does no work? Babies do no work for one. The elderly do no work. Ill individuals may not do work. The mentally or physically disabled often do no work.This raises an important question: How can individuals, who do not work, survive?For any given person who does not work, someone must work for them, and produce more than what it is they need (surplus). Marx calls the work that goes into maintaining the working individual 'Necessary Labor', and the work done for the benefit of individuals other than themselves, 'Surplus Labor'.So, how does a society decide (1) Who will work, how much of what they produce goes to them, and how much of what they produce goes to others, and (2) who will not work, but live off of the surplus labour of others, and how much will they receive? Historically, there have been 5 different arrangements to this problem: Communism - A community of people work together, produce surplus, maintain it, and decide how to distribute it. As an example, my opponent and I decide to grow some food, and decide what to do with it. Ancient - In this case, a solitary individual, not a group of people, performs the work, maintains it, and determines how to distribute the surplus. (I grow some food, and decide how I will distribute what I will not consume). Slave - Work is done by a person or group of people, but nothing they produce belongs to them, but the slave owner. For instance, a slave produces food, and the slave owner determines how much food the slave gets, and how much the slave owner gets, and what to do with the surplus. Feudalism - The work is done by serfs, and some of what they produce goes to them, and some goes to the landlord. The lord maintains and distributes the surplus. For instance, a serf grows some food, a portion of it stays with the serf, and the rest goes to the lord. The lord decides what to do with the extra. Capitalism - The work is done by wage earners, and they do not control, maintain, or distribute. They receive a wage, or salary, and do not own anything they produce; the owner does. For example, some workers grow some food, they are paid a wage equivalent to some of that food, but not all of it (remember, Capitalism seeks to make profit), and the capitalist controls the produce, and determines what to do with it. The last three arrangements are exploitative arrangements, because the individuals doing the work do not have ownership of the surplus they produce (and in some cases, they do not have ownership of any of it), and are not in control of how it is distributed.In other words, the non-workers are contributing little to nothing, but are reaping the majority benefits of those who are working. You will notice that, out of the three latter systems, Capitalism and Slavery are the of the closest relations, as in both cases the workers do not own what they produce, and the owner (Slave holder for slavery, and capitalist for Capitalism) determines how much of what someone produces is given to them (Capitalists, by determining how much they will pay someone for the labour performed). This is where the term "wage-slavery" comes from, due to the slave-like arrangement of the system.There is much more I wish to say, but I have not the room. I will leave on this note, and allow my opponent to give their rebuttals. Next round I will elaborate further on the merits of Communism, the atrocity of Capitalism, as well as provide rebuttals for my opponent's arguments.