Machiavelli focused more on the political power of the country, while John Locke focused more on the rights of the people. It is true? I said that both had the same goal, which was to seek the best of the state, but Locke was much less extremist and focused more on the rights of his people. Despite their contradictions about “sovereignty,” John Locke and Niccolò Machiavelli shared an obvious concern, namely the concern for the betterment of society. It is evident that both philosophers had common ways of thinking regarding what a ruler should and should not do. It is precisely how a ruler should behave to gain the sovereignty of his state that has led to a difference of opinion. Machiavelli and Locke both considered the nature of government and man's individual interests in relation to governmental structures. Machievelli's idea of ​​luck and Locke's concept of the "state of nature" both shaped theorists' arguments about the purpose of political life. It has been suggested that for Machiavelli politics is an unpredictable arena in which ambition, deception and violence render the idea of ​​the common good meaningless, while Locke would argue that political or civil society exists only to preserve the rights of the individual. It can be argued that for both Machiavelli and Lock political activity therefore simply becomes a means to satisfy selfish needs.