Communism/Marxism is superior to Capitalism

To start, I would like to refute my opponent's framework, contentions and go on to my own contentions. Seeing that this topic is value-based, my opponent failed to provide a weighing mechanism for this debate to be weighed on. Thus, i will give the value as justice and the value criterion as net benefits. My opponent's topicality for this debate was to define communism in terms of a stateless system in which a small fragment of democratic government exists. His definition is much too restrictive and abusive. I would like to define communism as stateless system where there is no "fragment of democratic government." Also, Bolshevik Communism shouldn't be ruled out as it gives a tangible example of the effects of the aforementioned communist system. Now, I would like to refute my opponent's contentions. His first contention was that communism eliminates class struggles. While this may seem true on the surface, it has flaws. As my opponent stated in his first speech, a communist command economy distributes wealth based on labor quotas. Thus, the ones who don't math the quotas will be paid less than the ones who did. This would result in a class struggle. The ones who meet the quotas (the Borge) would then oppress the ones who don't match the quotas (the Proles). This would eventually result in a divided social class with the rich and the poor with no middle class in between. Capitalism offers a middle class, when communism only offers class warfare. My opponent states through his second claim that everybody has a chance to rise to the top. He also goes on to state that in capitalism, one can't due to "lack of assertiveness." Ones who have a lack of assertiveness shouldn't be automatically moved to the top. He states that communism recognizes physical skills. Lack of assertiveness or competitiveness is NOT a noteworthy skill that should be encouraged. Thus, the lazy people, according to my opponent, would move up the social ladder even though he stated that only people who benefit the society do. Thus, my opponent is illogically stating that a person with a lack of work ethic should be rewarded for his contributions to our society. My opponent's third contention weighed the benefits vs. harms between a command economy and free market system. He stated that a free market will decay and "implode" due to its inefficiencies. However, he never stated any evidence to support this ludicrous statement. Also, he goes on about class differences being solved by distribution of wealth based on a labor quota system. Again, this quota system leads to a class difference between the ones who "lack assertiveness" and the ones who actually do work. Also, these two types of people would be paid differently, creating "class difference." Also, with no incentives to work hard, the command economy would collapse due to lack of labor. Finally, my opponent stated through his fourth contention that racism and gender inequality would be eradicated due to the absence of class struggle. However, there is no direct correlation between class struggle and racism or sexism. Those ideas amount from other variable other than class struggle. Also, as I stated oh so many times, class struggle wouldn't be eradicated because people would still made different amounts of money (just like capitalism) and that leads to class struggle, as my opponent stated. Lastly, I would like to go over some voting issues. My opponent supplied abusive framework without even supplying a weighing mechanism. Thus, the opposition took on the burden of doing that. Also, all of my opponent's contention have been refuted, leaving him with no case. Also, I would like to stress the fact that the opposition will be trying to disprove the affirmation rather than explain why capitalism is superior to communism.