Could a nation exist with just a bureaucracy alone with no democracy

It's be a pain in the ass.

Legitimization is a key aspect of a government. Mesopotamians did it by building temples and stellae, democracies do it by holding elections.

Without a monarchy, a theocracy, or a democracy to provide legitimacy to the power structure, there would be a substantial risk of instability.

And without elections to provide some accountability for abuse of power, the government would likely become less and less interested in the rule of law over time.

>>2663841

NO.

A BUREAUCRATIC GOVERNMENT IS A GOVERNMENT IN DECAY, AND A DISINTEGRATING NATION, THUS, A GOVERNMENT THAT IS A PURE BUREAUCRACY, NECESSARILY ENTAILS A VIRTUALLY NONEXISTENT NATION.

>>2663841
That would be called a corporation.

>>2663852

What about an oligarchy or some sort of ruling aristocratic republic?

How does that legitimize itself?

The Rules would be risen up to a godhead, yet small factions would arise via interpretations of non-specific rules. Innovation would stagnate.

>>2663841
Yes Belgium exists.

File: apotheosis of bureaucracy.jpg (54KB, 600x401px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x401px

>>2663841
Good question.

>>2663864
>reducing formerly legitimate terms to imprecise buzzwords

>>2663895
The EU holds elections for the EU parliament, and the parliaments of the countries the EU consists of hold elections, too.

Elections are democratic legitimizations. OP asked about a situation without, among others, democratic legitimizations.

>>2663874
>we have better blood than the peasants
>it's the natural way of things
>god ordained it

Typically some combination of these.

>>2663841
It was called "Soviet Union after Stalin".