It seems to me that you did a good job adapting your prior writing to the context. In getting shorter it got blunter, naturally, and risks ideological self-parody to an extent it takes subtlety to avoid. (I am a little surprised at the reliance on low-quality journalistic sources: why not actual scholarship rather than news-service websites?)

But in the course of reworking your rereading no doubt made you aware that at the very moment you wrote Trump and Musk, Kennedy and Rubio, were (not from Marxist or feminist motives, to be sure) implementing your program thoroughly. They have destroyed faster than anyone could have thought possible the infrastructure of health care relied upon by millions of women, here and around the world, that you have so trenchantly criticized. (It turned out to be not capitalism but American social democracy that had achieved these compromised goals, which is what made it possible for them to be so easily devastated, but that's just one among the ironies.)

This state of affairs turns the focus even more urgently to the question your original work did not address: how to replace what you do not want with what you do. With every passing day serious, sometimes irreparable, harm is done to vulnerable people. Marx is quite right that philosophers can criticize the world, but the point is to change it. Now we most desperately need your second draft,. the one that takes this criticism for given, and shows us what has to be put in place instead,