i've got the power...or do i?

True or false: true power is held in authority. In the mind of the unquestioning person the answer is true. However, I hold to the opposite side of this argument because of many facts, observations, and logical ideas, which I will expand on in this essay, that point power away from authority. I have resolved that true power is held by the majority of the population, and not by authority.
If a government has no people following it, what power does it hold? Who does it have power over? With no people to support a ruling body, it will crumble and fall, because people are the foundation of all government. If a group of people turns on its leaders then the power of the government is lost and often a revolt will occur. It is true that most revolts are not effective in removing the current government and replacing it with a new one. That may be correct, but all revolts inevitably instigate change. The power of the people is proven and puts fear into the government. Without change it will be overthrown. Take the American Revolution as an example. With the British king heavily taxing English citizens in America and persecuting them, the Americans revolt. The government in England cannot stand up to the armed forces of its citizens. Who held the power in the American Revolution? Was it held by the government or by the people "under the control" of the government? Now we have the American Army to enforce the laws of the government and to force the people to be submissive. Correct, but are not the members of the army a portion of the population also? They pay taxes, follow the laws of the government, and elect the leaders. If they are not happy with the government, then they have just as much right to turn on it as any other person does.
Many people believe the Constitution has established an indestructible hold on the power of the government. The Constitution is supreme and should be followed. However, the Constitution has been changed many times already to address new issues encountered in the developing world. What is one more change to give power to the people? If the Constitution must be followed in order to prevent the destruction then it should be followed, but not blindly and not without changes.
This is not anarchy. Anarchy is the absence of a government, and is characterized by lawlessness. This is the idea that, while a government is necessary to make laws and maintain foreign relations, the people have the power to overthrow the current government and implement a new one as is needed. Anarchy would be a country with no leader; this is a country with a leader chosen by the people but holding ephemeral power.
Is power held in authority? I am resolved that it is not based on the fact that a small body of people will never be more powerful than a larger one, no matter what titles they are given to show that they have "power." Society of the present and of past shows that majority will always be stronger than authority.