I assume this question was about the power and authority that a government is granted by the people? If that is the case, then I believe that it's good to have a strong (but small) government, with the authority to protect the people and their property. However, if said government gets out of control then they should have to answer to the people, and it (government) should never interfere with civil liberties so long as the citizens are not hurting anyone.
Otherwise, there is no freedom and therefore no rights at all. We may choose not to exercise free speech, but nobody can take our power to do so. Inequity in power between individuals is what leads to the curtailment rights, and the end of a free ad democratic society for people as a whole.
As for Authority, in a truly democratic country, supreme authority lies in constitutional law, which delegates power to the people, so yes it is a right as well.
Our rights are to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Which entitlement to power goes strictly against these principles. In practice, with pseudo-libertarians, particularly corporatists, the only people who end up getting any freedom are those who pursue power. And the rest are under the domination of Government-like establishments that are not accountable to the people and operate on their own interests. Which is exactly where the issue of private property becomes a problem. Its just a way to claim ownership and monopoly on something others use, and restrict people from being able to do so. Which the only way one can even have any legitmacy of power is if a large group of people gives them power. Like protection of power is a form of Government dependence, where the Government works to protect the power another weilds.