OK, so we go republic. But which kind? The one like America where all it takes is one nutcase and four years to destroy everyones' faith in their institutions? Don't fancy that, sorry!
The one like some other European countries where the President signs bits of paper, goes for dinners, etc etc. In other words, what we have now but with somebody elected to be powerless, rather than somebody born to it?
In practical terms, WTF is the difference? Well, I'll tell you one. If a monarch is an idiot, then you can keep them in the Palace, have them sign the papers and let a saner member of the family lay the wreaths and shit. But if your President is an idiot, then you're stuck. Because they were elected by the public and said public will rightly demand that they be seen to be earning their salary.
Don't elect an idiot? Who else is going to stand? Because all they'll get is a Civil Service salary and a mews house in a posh area of London for four years. In return for being nice to people you don't know and/or don't like, having no private life and not being allowed to express an opinion, ever!
Every four years you hold an election. You can control the candidate list, which means you get senior civil servants, Life Peers or members of the landed gentry. Ten people bother to vote and millions of others grumble about the salary this mumbling old git is getting for doing fuck-sll.
You could go fully democratic and let the people choose the candidates as well as vote. But you know the Great British Public as well as I do. Do we want the global face of Britain to be a succession of fading soccer players, super-annuated pop stars, vintage sitcom or soap 'actors', oir reality TV 'stars'? Do we really want/need President Cliff, President Becks, President Del-Boy. President Gazza, President Rowling, President Nadiya et al?
Or why not simply stick with an hereditary figurehead, trained from infancy to have no power and no opinions but with the ability to shake hands, nod and smile and infinitum?
I'd also argue that our system is eminently fit for purpose. The Crown, in which all authority and power resides, is an institution, impersonal, apolitical and incorruptible. Those who serve it and the people, those who exercise the delegated authority, do so amid their peers who can and frequently do hold them to account.
One can admire the ideal of "full, equal inclusion and fairness". One can build towards a structure which approaches that state. But the libertarian, egalitarian ideal inevitably crashes into one immovable obstacle: the unmitigated and irredeemable stupidity of 90% of the human race. The people who never have and never will be able to understand the issues at hand or the consequences of their decisions, but are nevertheless given the largest say in what is to be done about said issues, and suffer most from the consequences when wrong decisions are made. Stupid people don't elect stupid people. They elect corrupt people who are clever enough to provide simple but false answers to complex questions. That's why the Tories will keep winning and the Lib-Dems and Greens never will. The problem of democracy is this. - As of December 2021, there were 46,560,452 people registered (and therefore eligible) to vote in General elections in the UK. After 40 years of observation, conversation, activism and frustration I can say with a degree of certainty that a maximum of 4, 656.,045 of them have even the smallest degree of the understanding, knowledge and intelligence needed to cast their vote responsibly and for the good of everyone. A good half of those will, of course, not vote because there is nobody to vote for who is prepared to do the right, or even necessary, things.
