I've long thought that part of the problem with a lot of pop-hist is simply that what went down in continental Europe did not involve either the UK or US in any profound way. There is just no basis for understanding WHY revolution(s) was necessary in the end.For the UK, I think the US revolution had a far greater impact on the British political landscape. While the French revolution terrified the upper classes (to some extent at least), it was the US revolution that really fed into the long history of British/English democratic growth, political thought and philosophy. Perhaps it could be said that the “average Brit” wanted a state closer to post-revolutionary US rather than post revolutionary France. The upper classes of course wanted neither!
The European states really feared was a new revolutionary zeal sweeping up their own population (the German Terror, Spanish Terror etc) or the new Republic expanding their revolution to the neighbours via military means. What they got was a new Empire expanding their borders, so business as usual for Europe I guess!
The political stakes and the necessary transformation of society wasn't an issue in either place. The French Enlightenment literally wanted France to become like England – the monarchy would rather die than that. The colonies that became the US already had the kind of society that it took waves of European revolutions to approach. And event then it didn't work until the powers-that-be for fear of their own people decided to stark tweaking things to try to comply.
So I take it you also somehow isn't getting what the problem the revolutions was a way of addressing was...