There are advantages to the efficiency of authoritarian power, but how do they handle peaceful transition of power? How do they handle abuse?
A lot of democratic stability comes from it being hard to change things quickly, separation of power, and the existence of a lot free speech so it's hard to cover things up. Ultimately, with a dependence on the people.
I could be persuaded that there are better ways to structure things within that, if a lot of thought was put into how to handle a tyrant's rise and how to handle a transition of power. I probably could not be persuaded that limits on speech and government censorship are good long-term for the health of a society that I'd want to actually live in. I think it's a good thing for governments to ultimately be accountable to their people.
I generally agree with the sentiment that elected leaders fear getting voted out, while dictators fear getting dragged out. The ability to vote seems important for long term stability.
In China's case, it seems they've done away with terms entirely for Xi. Speech and dissent is tightly (and violently) controlled, and even when there's just potential for future dissent, entire groups are put into camps to destroy their culture to supposedly reduce that risk.
The west has problems too, but there's a reason people emmigrate out to countries that are more free when they're allowed to.
Enormous economic growth and strategic planning have allowed their people to accept this abuse for now, though the party should be worried if that ever changes.