Non-democratic, non-free China's economy has been growing 5 times faster than democratic, free India's.

This is despite both countries starting from the same, largely rural, highly impoverished starting point 60 years ago.[1]

So, yes, they'd rather be the absolute leaders of a faster growing economy, than the non-leaders of a slower-growing one.

[1] China was even worse off, actually, since it spent the first half of the twentieth century torn apart by civil war, European colonialism, civil war again, a brutal Japanese invasion and occupation, and then some more civil war, followed by two decades of self-inflicted political purges and repression. India only had to contend with two of these problems!

India's massive bureaucratic system runs far deeper and more local than China ever has. The amount of paperwork and payoffs for even basic stuff in India is insane.

China on the other hand is mostly free and liberal up until you start being successful.

Acting like India isn't engage in authoritarian mass intervention, even though its in a more decentralize fashion is totally wrong. The only benefit is they have more independent courts and you can succeed with influence buying without the top-down threat that the CCP does to cripple foreign competitors in domestic firms favours.

India has a different sort of economic interference - but also one that's far easier to fix. Something Modi repeatedly promised and keeps failing to do.

This video is a good overview of how the Indian gov cripples business: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVwIZzGHxwc

The assertion was not that China is growing slower than India, but that the current Chinese economy is growing slower than a more liberal Chinese economy.

Then it is a completely unfalsifiable claim, and is, therefore, unprovable.

Yes. While I realize HN fetishizes appearing logical, not everything in economics falls in such a bucket.