Well, regarding the Rebels/Vietcong thing, unlike Vader being Luke’s father (or for that matter, Greedo always shooting first), that actually WAS backed up by development notes that Lucas personally wrote, dating back to 1973 no less. Case in point: https://otnesse.tumblr.com/post/162081709399/this-is-from-george-lucas-1973-notes-for-star I’d definitely buy at least that since that actually IS backed up by actual development notes he wrote (by contrast, the shooting script for the same film, which definitely was written by Lucas, if anything, pointed to Han Solo originally shooting Greedo instead of Greedo shooting Han and then Han shooting Greedo in turn).
And quite frankly, when Lucas already made clear he didn’t like capitalism (heck, he practically based the Trade Federation on the left’s view of capitalism [well, that, and also the 1994 Republican Revolution], and has made no secret that he doesn’t want “capitalistic democracy” and advocated for a pure democracy akin to the Occupy groups, even voicing solidarity to the so-called “99%”. This is all stated in interviews made by Lucas.) and rooted for known Communists (even quoting Marx at one point regarding the Hollywood studios, and that’s not even getting into how he freely admitted that he based the Ewoks and the Rebels on the Vietcong and the Empire on America), I’m pretty sure those things definitely were very apt descriptions of him and what he tried to push. To be fair to the bit about Leia in the original film, she did actually warn them about how the Empire most likely let them escape specifically to track them, and if anything it was Han Solo who blew off the warning and cited he was only concerned about his pay, not in their revolution. So in that case, it was more Solo’s fault that the Empire succeeded in tracking them than Leia’s fault.
As far as the Prequels, eh, I’d say the Prequels are barely better than The Last Jedi, to be honest. At least they don’t pretty much cut the story short when they aired, while The Last Jedi was notorious for doing that by killing off a lot of plot threads that would have been necessary for continuing the story. And I won’t accuse you of being paid by Kathleen Kennedy, BTW, even if you voice support for the film. After all, I have no evidence, so what good would accusing you do? Plus, she’d really need to have a lot of resources at her beck and call to bother paying someone who doesn’t have any known connections to Disney to defend her or her film.
And the developers are the ones who actually MADE the film, so yes, they actually DO have the final word ultimately, just as George Lucas had the final word on Obi-Wan’s home planet’s name, despite it only being given as a joke on a talk show/fake news station like the Jon Stewart Show. So if they say it was meant to push feminism and SJWisms, that’s pretty much what it’s trying to do, not in our position to question it even if we disagree. After all, Kojima’s praise for Che Guevara as shown in Peace Walker via Big Boss and Miller to the extent that the game treats him as a sinless saint doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny when you remember he nearly caused World War III via the Cuban Missile Crisis in a genocidal campaign against America for his ideas of Marxist liberation [basically what Volgin nearly tried to do in Snake Eater]. Doesn’t change the fact that he clearly was shilling for Che Guevara, as you can see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usYtK3d2ydk
Any SJW stuff these people are allegedly pushing seems to have gotten lost in production too. As I say, if making the women so unsympathetic and the men so awesome is what constitutes pushing an SJW agenda, I'd hate to see what pushing the opposite agenda would be like! Of course, if those SJWs on staff wanted to help their case, they'd shut the hell up and let the fans interpret things any way they want (the way they're obviously going to do anyway).
Concerning how the prequels "didn't cut the story short" when they were in theaters, I should point out that's a lot of the (non-ideological) reason I heard for people not liking them back when they first rolled out: all that talking and conferencing and parliamentary procedure "just to get to five minutes of cool stuff!" as Honest Trailers put it. The way George Lucas regularly packed all material he deemed relevant into Star Wars was also nearly the downfall of his first movie, as detailed in this video.
Something I can also point out is that a lot of the stuff they cut for pacing purposes from that first Star Wars movie works just fine in the original novelization, where it was not cut: that scene with Jabba that got spliced back into the later Special Editions, for instance, and the scenes with Luke's friend Biggs telling him about his plans to join the Rebel Alliance, and warning him that he and farmers everywhere may be enslaved soon because the evil Empire is nationalizing industries. (If George Lucas was such a commie sympathizer as you say, I wonder why he ever wrote that part into it; commies typically love nationalizing industries.) My conclusion: had LucasFilm decided to adapt some sequels from the franchise's expanded universe novels of the time (several dozen of which I bought and read and still own, incidentally) instead of doing the prequels, the fandom's reaction might have been very much the same: "Aw, why'd the movie have to go on and on about the New Republic's political reforms? Just give us a light saber fight already!"
I'm also not seeing The Last Jedi killing off plot threads so much as putting them on hold. Actually, my only concern for the final film is that J.J. Abrams is notorious for being better at starting stories than finishing them: this is the guy who left everyone dissatisfied with the ending to his TV series Lost, after all. While I'd rather not have a focus group ending to the final movie (because those tend to suck), Abrams definitely needs to come up with definitive answers to all of the questions left unanswered from The Force Awakens in The Last Jedi, or else step aside and let someone else answer them.