I agree with a lot of your sentiment here. I do want to say that your definition of "enlightened self-interest" seems a bit flawed to me. At least, it doesn't coincide with my understanding of the term.

Its a philosophy in ethics that states that an individual, by acting in the interest of the community, a group, or society in general, acts in its own interest.

Example: I rob a bank. I do so because, I want money, and therefore it's in my self-interest. However, now I've set myself up to either go to prison, die in the act, or be looking over my shoulder for the rest of my life fearing that I'll be caught. So, thinking rationally about it, thinking about it in an enlightened way, this is not in my self-interest at all.

But if I act in accordance with "enlightened self-interest", am I choosing to not rob a bank because it's in the interest of society or the group? No. I'm doing it because prison/death/life-long anxiety is against my self-interest.

Enlightened self-interest is about trying to see past immediate, obvious consequences. It's about sharpening one's self-interest, making more accurate judgments about consequences. It's about being practical. But it's always ultimately about self-interest. (Since all value springs from the "self".)

That being said, supporting and fighting for a peaceful and just society or group is definitely in everyone's enlightened self-interest.

Am I nit-picking? I don't think so. But feel free to say so. :)