I feel like this is an extremely unpopular opinion but I really don't think republicanism was a step forward for humanity.
Monarchy is the most intuitive form of government. People tend to take care of what they own, and politicians have no incentive to leave anything better for the next generation because they really have no stake in their country. Their legacy dies with them.
A monarchy with constitutional (and familial) checks and balances is vastly preferable to a republic where the foreign interests run free and loot the taxpayers. It's pure and much simpler. No Congress, no Supreme Court, no ridiculous sham elections. Everyone knows who's in charge and what the rules are.
Well... Not every monarchy was as bad as the English monarchy.
After all, they didn't last anywhere near as long.
Where a monarchy is successful, however, is getting things done promptly and when we look at our charade of a government I can see why OP would crave that.
The blood in my veins -- like yours, presumably -- compels my distaste towards monarchs, but I will recognize there were a few positive aspects in a monarchy that cares about its people.
Traditionally, they were easier to overthrow as well because they could only field armies of common folk who had families that were fed up.
Actually English monarchy, just like all other European monarchies, was perfectly good and was ensuring God's laws were being followed and their peoples lived prosperously.
It was when, after 400 years, the Khazarians finally managed to put their toes back into the country and then managed to establish a Central bank, that it slowly became what it became. The blood line thats on the throne right now is not even the same as the bloodline before all this happened.