Capitalism, Egoism, Utilitarianism

Smith himself conceives his system as entailing a subscription to Moral Egoism.  But Bentham combines that with Smith's thesis that such conduct promotes total wealth, into 'Utilitarianism'.  However, the reference to 'utility' is misleading--what his system measures is Pleasure, in terms of which 'Utility' is defined, so, that doctrine is actually a variety of Hedonism.  Mill's attempt to distance his variation of Utilitarianism from simple Hedonism arguably fails, and is more distinguished by its emphases on Consequentialism and General Happiness.  Now, recently, Bentham's original model becomes even more strained.  On one hand, the measure of Generality, GNP, is indifferent to its Individual components.  On the other hand, what for Smith and Bentham is normative Egoism, is usually conceived in current Capitalism as Hobbesian, i. e. descriptive, Egoism.  As a result, a concept of Generality is typically no longer an ingredient in the everyday Economic behavior of Individual participants, i. e. they no longer conceive their self-interested pursuits as, at the same, promoting national wealth, as if concern for the latter has been outsourced to the Invisible Hand.  So, some who consider themselves hardline Capitalists are actually Morally incoherent.