It's not that important that there is not a completly free market. I come from a country which has this intervetionalist market since 1989 (actually 90s were the quite good in terms of national market) and now EU. 40 years of central planning under russia, protectionsim under austria all the way back to feudalism.

From my POV it's OK(ish).

There was a free market though in the history. Liberalism and free market were a thing until Great war.

If we want to fix the mess socialism of all forms caused (from Marx to Keynes) we should focus on bringing back free market and capitalism.

Bitching about 8 corps trying to kill us is IMO ineffective way to spend energy. Convincing ppl not to eat garbage even more.

If you're poor you don't (usually) have choices. We as a society need to fight for a chance for poor to not stay poor. As I mentioned you can't decide if a shelter or new shoes are more imporant then not eating processed food.

The only way to achieve that is to rise our productivity. It's been proved that you can only do that with more effective production means (like technology) and/or better labour divison and specialization.

If we step back and talk about let's say computer chips instead of food. Is it better to have taiwan/tsmc specialized in making high volume of high quality processors for low prices or demand decentralization leading to crappy expensive chips? Btw. something probably about to happen in US and EU by forcefully bringing the chip production somewhere to no enterpretour would choose willingly.

Decentralization is good for political power distribution not production. I'll give an example. If you have only one mine of let's say cooltium and you need that thing to make pretty much everything you will concentrate the production there. You centralize to reduce costs and provide customers better prices the  concurrency.