Sovereignty is not up for debate.
If it needs to argue its legitimacy, it's not legitimate.
Sovereignty in that sense, is an absolute, but it's an absolute with fluidity.
The modern way in which authority expresses itself is a form of superstition. People think it is a position like a job. In reality, it is more akin to a natural calling. If you have the power to command and inspire loyalty, you have authority over the domain in which you are able to do this.
This is not a 'might is right' view of power, for force of might does not necessarily have any connection to loyalty but is almost totally a matter of one's resources. Furthermore, the great paradox is that when a political entity (or any entity or any person, really) uses force or might, this is because they are not able to achieve what they need through negotiation, reciprocation and dialectic. Granted, sometimes this is necessary, and there are reoccurring domains where this remains necessary. In a perfect world, outside threats would be dealt with forcefully if they did not demonstrate their intentions to communicate peacefully. Inner threats like violent crime would be met with force to stop or prevent the act from happening.
But we don't live in a perfect world.
And as we speak, the governments of the whole western world, which are all essentially the same hegemonic bloc, are squandering their resources. They are not only squandering resources, but the trust of the governed. This has the appearance of 'authoritarianism' and is right to be considered so, for we no longer have legitimate leaders. They are businessmen who treat the population like criminals.
Going back to what I said earlier about the nature of sovereignty, it's important to note that there is also a degree to which sovereignty is horizontal, in that everyone possesses some degree of sovereignty over their surroundings, even if not 'political actors' of any kind. We're speaking about something which ultimately transcends politics but which politics often tries (and often tragically fails) to codify. It's the truth that a regular man can have the wisdom of a sage or king. Mankind has long tried to form its various republics which can capture this phenomenon in a system, which might be ideal and provide some sense of security and certainty in a civilization, but it ultimately evades any system.
When a system is inherently corrupt, the people do best to remember their archaic sovereignty which isn't bound to titles or their use value as productive economic instruments.
Ultimately, the degree to which our governments are using force - thus taxing the limits of their purely material ability to leverage temporary advantages - is in direct proportion to the degree to which history, culture and our own genetic and cognitive development is culminating toward a true understanding of freedom as a fundamental reality of existence.
I'm not putting forth anarchism, or any other political ideology or style of government, for that's not the point. We are hurdling toward a point of no return which will have a massive effect on the shape of the world. It's been our destiny since the birth of man.
This freedom which is working it's way to the surface of history will not belong to everyone because some will not want it, to put it simply. They'll essentially desire to be slaves. For healthy people, it's best to exclude these people because they are a liability. In the name of security, they appeal to entities with force and leverage on their side in order to engineer everyone's behavior.
It almost doesn't matter what 'type of government' you live under or want to construct with this destiny of freedom in mind. The important thing to remember is that any legitimate sovereign political entity will understand itself as an embodiment of the values of a free people, which both encourages people to excel with respect to their values and secures them from outside threats (ideally, inner threats and outer threats are to be treated differently).
There is a tragic element to this, in that, as stated before, many people, maybe even most people, might not want freedom. The reasons are not entirely important, at least not for this discussion, because it gets us into all kinds of chicken-and-egg territory. The point is, they're not predisposed toward it, will desire their own slavery, and as is often the case with broken, mentally unstable people, will resent people unlike them and blame them for the consequences of their own actions. It is best if such people, who are incapable of honoring the inherent dignity of human sovereignty, are demoralized and limited in their power over the people who are capable of realizing it.
As we head into turbulent times, remember your dignity as a free agent. Realize your sovereignty over your mind and body. You were designed by nature to be able to consider these things, be aware of them, and thus cultivate the ability to develop them.
The seeds of a future which recognizes this dignity is already present within you, and you share it with all those who have a will and desire to meditate on whatever is noble, beautiful, good and true.