There is a valid place for a figure who's a "spokesperson" for the country though. When there's a national disaster and we need someone to put on TV to provide

There is a valid place for a figure who's a "spokesperson" for the country though. When there's a national disaster and we need someone to put on TV to provide calming words, when we want to organize charitable efforts, or send someone on tours to represent our interests, it's great to have a figure who can be brought out as a single trusted, respectable voice for the nation. This person, almost by nature, cannot be an elected official. The moment you drag a PM or President-- ANY PM or President-- into the role, you're going to have 40% of the population ignoring the message because of toxic political divisiveness. You've also got the factor that many of them are short-term players-- if you were a real-estate developer until 5 years ago, you don't necessarily develop the same people skills and self-presentation. In a way, having it be some sort of hereditary position works, because it's such a delicate job that you want a clear pipeline of people who can be developed for the job, trained for life, and kept "on call" for their turn. Now, you could argue there's a way to get this sort of service with better value for money, perhaps bringing in a similar role with some more republican-friendly title instead of an allusion to an old absolute monarchy, but I can see the value a figurehead monarch can provide. Elizabeth II has done, by any possible measure, a spectacular job in the spokesperson role for the country. Even the most ardent republicans generally don't dislike her on a personal level, and you can send her anywhere and be sure she won't cause an international incident.