I was quite drunk when I wrote the above so don't know if any of the above is useful.
Dlaurent: I wish I was the world's leading expert, I know quite a lot about the therapeutic side of things, and have lots of practical experience here. I've done some Reichian trainings in Oslo and about 4 years of weekly sessions in the UK. I know less about the socio-political side of thigs, I've read both the books you mention but not for a few years. I think your point about outdated Marxist defintions is well made. I'd add that Reich was such a polymath, continually following the line of his emerging researches that he never went back to his earlier works and revisted and repolished them. I'm not sure how the later Reich would see these earlier poltical works.
I agree with Jon in that I think character armour is a really important concept. Reich used to use it as way of explaining why political and social change is so hard, because our conservatism, timidity, rigidity or whatever is held in our bodies, mostly outside of awareness, and simply changing the economic set up isn't going to address this (not that it's at all simple). I often think very politically minded people seem dead to this reality or see the body and emotional and sensual life as bourgeosis indulgences , which is just - wrong. This is why he was so critical of the Left, "Red Fascists" after his communist period. He saw with a psychoanalyst's eye, alll the pent up sadism and aggression that was in movements like Stalinism and can be found in "the Left" more generally, however egalitarian the ideology. He's pretty excoriating about Marxism and other ideologies in Listen, Little Man in v straightforward language. That's why he was interested in child rearing practices and education as ways of producing "unarmoured life" or simply put less fucked up people.
Hope this of some use?