Revolutions and the way we now think

This has to do with the question about if we should somehow be under the authority of church leaders. I'm wondering if our thinking has been affected by the world we live in today.
How many pure absolute monarchy's are there in existence today?
Not many, if any. It was in the 1700' and 1800's that many revolutions took place around the world and governments changed. (And after World War II, the many colonies obtained their independence, disolving empires.) Now everyone thinks they have a say.
Whether the revolutions were good or bad, I can't say. But I have heard it said that back in the 1800's people, seeking to discredit the Bible because it says "honor the king" and "the powers that be are of God" etc., supported the theory of evolution. If there is no Creator, no absolute law-giver, no King of kings, then we can say or do as we please. This is humanism.

Has our thinking been affected by this humanism? Do we believe that anyone can do what they want, and not have to submit to authority?
I see two extremes. One was vaunted and perpetuated by the Catholic church, survived the Reformation and is, at least somewhat, present in Protestant churches, and that is the extreme that mere men are given too much authority over other men, even to the point of papal worship--which has its origins in the religions of Egypt and Babylon. The other extreme is that everyone does what they think is right in their own eyes and sees no authority as being valid.

So now it comes to the issue of should we obey church leaders. Well, one could argue that government has always been different for the church than for the world. Jesus said,
"Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."
So we see that the order in the kingdom of heaven is quite different than how things work down here.

But what about these verses:

Psalm 75:5-7 "Lift not up your horn on high: speak not with a stiff neck. For promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the judge: he putteth down one, and setteth up another."
Rom 13:1 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."
I Thes 5:12-13 "And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. And be at peace among yourselves."
I Tim 5:17 "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine."
Heb 13:17 (still waiting for an explanation of the submit part)

It does seem as if there is a distinction between those who are elders and those who are not. At the very least, elders are due more respect (double honor).

I think it's interesting to take a look at Israel. Isn't the ideal government theocracy? Daniel's name - "God is my judge. " I Tim 1:9, "The law is not made for a righteous man." If we would all obey God, there would be no need for law enforcers. But in Israel's history, they turned away from God soon after they got into the land. Then it was the time of judges, when every man did what was right in his own eyes. Then they wanted a king as the other nations. In this, God said they rejected him. If they would have obeyed God, then all would be priests to him and each man would have his own vine and his own fig tree to this day. Now God says that he will make a new covenant in which he shall put his law into their minds and write them in their hearts. Praise God.
It seems that man's nature requires leadership.

Thoughts?