It has long been an axiom of political economy that the first duty of the sovereign, or of whatsoever governing authority stands in that office, is the defence and maintenance of the society over which he presides. I argued in my Wealth of Nations that the sovereign's legitimate offices are precisely three: the defence of the society from external violence, the administration of justice among its members, and the erection of those publick works which private interest will not undertake alone. Nowhere among these duties did I propose that he might, in moments of foreign negotiation, set aside all consideration of how his people purchase bread, pay their rents, and send their children to market.
Yet the chief magistrate of the United States, engaged in discussions with the government of Iran of a character not yet fully disclosed to his subjects, has seen fit to declare, in terms reported on the thirteenth of May, 2026, that he does not think about the financial situation of Americans. One pauses. One re-reads the sentence. One finds it unchanged.
The domestic price level in that republic stands, at this writing, at its highest point in three years. The labouring poor, who in any nation bear the first and heaviest weight of rising prices — for they cannot defer their consumption of flour, fuel, or shelter as the merchant may defer his investment in new manufactures — are accordingly in a condition that might, in a less distracted administration, be thought to warrant some portion of a magistrate's attention. Even a slender portion. Even a glance across the ledger on a Tuesday afternoon.
In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, I observed that the man of publick spirit adapts his private views to the interests of the greater society, and feels himself the guardian of every person within it. This is not a sentimental ornament to governance. It is the very mechanism by which a society coheres — the impartial spectator, if you will, seated in the breast of whoever holds the highest office, perpetually asking whether his conduct could bear the scrutiny of every subject he governs.
A sovereign who does not think about the financial situation of his people has not merely misplaced a priority. He has, in the vocabulary of my own system, ceased to exercise the faculty by which a ruler earns the name of ruler rather than merely occupying the chair. The chair, in such cases, continues to exist. Whether anything essential sits within it is the question that markets, and in due course the people themselves, are usually left to answer.