In American politics, ‘successful’ is subject to the many temporal winds of change.
I recall reading many years ago in a biography of the late Queen that a major difference between our two countries is that when things go wrong in Britain, the Prime Minister is voted down, but the people STILL sing ‘God Save The Queen’ (or ‘King’).
There’s something to be said for a national leader/institutional icon that stands outside of politics, and which people can still respect and value no matter what happens in politics.
We haven’t wanted such here - (though you could say that our Constitution and founding personalities represent the same) - but the institution of monarchy seems to work for the Brits.
That would be useful to have a head of state outside of politics. One who's not a Democrat or a Republican. But we got rid of the King. And we don't want a King. So how would it work in the American system?
“but the institution of monarchy seems to work for the Brits”m
For those who look down on the concept of Royalty, in particular the British royal family, I’m much more interested in British royalty with its thousand years of history and lineage than I am in this Country’s version of nouveau royalty, namely Hollywood. Depends on who you want to emulate and treat as royalty, and we worship trashy, tawdry Hollywood celebrities (not all of them, but many) as our version of royalty.
We have substituted Hollywood as our version of royalty, so as far as I can tell, we are far worse off in this Country with our faux royalty than by those on this thread that knock the British royal family who at least practice service to others and loyalty to their country as versus the heor worship of the socialist egomaniacs that infest Hollywood.