No. America was a nation very much founded on a shared set of ideals, namely freedom, equality, and some form of capitalism ("the pursuit of happiness" was originally "the pursuit of property", and the fifth amendment's ban on uncompensated takings). Now what form of equality (equality before the law, or equality of opportunity, or equality of outcome)? That's up to debate somewhat, as people took the core idea and put their spin on it. And what freedom means is also somewhat up to debate. But the ideals still existed for how vague they are, and people in America identified with them, even in their breech. There's a lot of struggle over who properly embodies the ideals versus the struggle of what the ideals are.
The issue with your argument is that the type of government and how it works isn't very related to the ideals, but mostly related to "how best to implement the ideals". So that style of government can change wildly, while still having the same ideals.
In contrast, most nations are founded on a native populace, not a set of ideals. France is for the French, Italy for the Italians, etc. The UK is a little more complicated, as its founded on 4 nationalities banding (or being bound) together under a monarch. Note that in these countries, the struggle is over who counts as French, or Italian, or British.
The weakest countries are founded on occupying a certain area, hence why people bemoan the arbitrary splits made by European powers in Africa, etc. This has not been helpful to them, as there's nothing really uniting them together.