Is totallitarianism the only way to achieve stability?

This is something i have pondered before but has sprung back to my mind.

In my mind i think democracy may be the fairest, but i dont think it is by any means the mist stable.

T have a smooth running society in my opinion you must have a very strong authority figure. Which is ongoing, holds no elections so on so forth.

This allows the authority to have Absolute power which will be uncontested which means its people cant uprise against it by voting in a different authority to a region within a country.

Also from a study i have done. When russia entered free trade and democracy everything went straight down the drains. The country is now in a vicious cycle of getting poorer and poorer because foreign business is destroying most of the budding business in russia.

China is a communist country (communist with some capitalist ideals) as far as i know. This counts it as totallitarian. Also, china is one of the most productive countries in the world and its labour force vast. However they force morally questionable policies on their people.

So time for the argument topic. what is more important, Stability or freedom.

Keep in mind, "free" countries may bring internal conflict through progression of an opposing power which may lead to war. Stability may mean the suffering of its people.

What do you deem more important?