Fine, except, what Smith really had his undies in a bunch about, through all of Part III, is that “the state” of his day–along with many other nation-states across a fair chunk of Europe–believed it was *harnessing* capitalism for nationalistic purposes. It wasn’t specifically the need for profit, but rather the need to maintain a favorable balance of exports over imports–the very root of mercantilism–that was driving economic policy in Great Britain at the time. It was also mercantilism that exalted the idea of coinage, in the form of those precious metals that Smith discusses in painfully long and painstakingly documented detail (and I thought *I* was bad), as a true measure of a nation’s wealth. When Smith mentions duty imposed on selected imports, outright bans on other imports as well as on certain exports, taxes on some internally-manufactured goods, bounties on targeted commodities–even, to a limited extent, sumptuary laws–those were all pieces of GB’s mercantilistic economic policy, which Smith saw as being based on false premises and faulty logic. Sorry; I just thought somebody ought to mention that.