Varieties of 'General Will'

At least five interpretations of 'General Will' seem possible: 1. It is a Nominalist concept equivalent to the aggregate of Individual Wills; 2. It is a heuristic concept useful in analyzing events; 3. It is a fundamental species drive; 4. It is a determinant of conduct as a means to social organization; 5. It is a combination of #3 and #4.  Now, #3 is Schopenhauer's version, #4 is Kant's, and either could be Rousseau's.  furthermore, whether or not he intends it as such, Smith's is a combination of #2 and #4--the former, the Invisible Hand as explaining the posited equilibrium of phenomena, the latter, the basis for the imperative for an individual to pursue Self-Interest exclusively, as opposed to Kant's concept of the General Will as a basis for overcoming Self-Interest.  Now, Marx-Engels vacillate between #3 and #4, thereby falling short of #5--their #4 is expressed in the analysis that when the Means of Production reaches a certain stage of development, the Proletariat becomes conscious of their solidarity, but, rather than further elaboration, they typically resort to their #3, i. e. History as Dialectically determining both the arrival at that stage, and what ensues.  In, contrast, a systematization of the General Will as a species drive, and the General Will as a Practical concept, e. g. the concept of the latter as a supplement to the former, is an example of #5.