Who is responsible for upholding the people-government relationship?

Although both the Declaration of Independence (referred to as "the Declaration") and John Locke’s Second Treatises on Government are extremely similar in terms of ideas that compose the two writings, they differ in one fundamental way: which audience they view is more important to understand their writings. Both writings recognize “the people” (those who are governed) and the government; they agree on concepts of equality, social contract theory, usurping authority justifiably, that the government is for, or in service of, the people, and that the people want government (which is implied in the social contract). But, these concepts are used differently; while Locke seeks to explain his theory, the Declaration seeks to employ the theory. Locke explains the reason for government and how and why the people submit to it – he spends more time on how the people should or do behave than he does on government. Furthermore, he asserts what reasons or actions justify usurping a government. The Declaration, on the other hand, does not explain the reason for their government or why the people should submit to it, but instead names “inalienable rights” and jumps to why their current government (the king of England) is not a justifiable government. These differences are mainly due to the intended audience, or who the writings respectively view as those who need to understand and uphold the embedded concepts the most. For Locke, it is most important that the people are aware of their relationship with the government – and with the other people – and be critical of it; the people are keepers/monitors of the (ultimate) authority (the ultimate authority itself would be what is right and what is wrong). For the Declaration, the “keeper” of authority is government, which should monitor itself and uphold the authority. But, even the Declaration writers felt that the people should pay (at least) some attention to how the people-government relationship was being handled. Otherwise, they would not have taken it upon themselves to criticize the king and break away from England at all. Ultimately, both sides need to be critical of the relationship, though both writings seem to suggest that the people are the most important, since it is them who consent for government, and allow it to exist.