Capitalism and Chrematistics

As has been previously discussed, Plato conceives Economics as a dimension of a Political system, while Aristotle conceives it as independent of the latter.  In other words, one is what has come to be known as Political-Economy, the other, as Micro-Economics.  On that basis, what is generally known as Macro-Economics, which studies topics such as the Gross National Product, is a variety of Micro-Economics, not of Political-Economy, i. e. because regardless of its National scope, it is still independent of any Political structure.  So, because Wealth of Nations considers no Political Theory, it would seem to qualify as Macro-Economics, not Political-Economy.  However, Aristotle might object to the implication that Smith's system is a variety of his concept of Economics.  For, he sharply distinguishes Economics from Chrematistics, i. e. Wealth as a means from Wealth as an end.  Now, in Smith's system, Profit can be a by-product of a Division of Labor that more efficiently produces Goods, and can be distributed via the Invisible Hand to those in need.  But, he also promotes Profit-seeking for its own sake as the fundamental behavioral principle, as do the majority of his followers.  So, to that extent, Capitalism is, from an Aristotelian perspective, Chrematistic, not either Micro- or Macro-Economics.