Which is related to the fact that OP doesn't understand that you can't fix a social and political problem with technology. Technology is
always downstream of the establishment, whatever that looks like.
We only think of computing as "personal" at all because of that brief period in the 70s when very simple toy computers, just powerful enough to run a spreadsheet and play some basic games, became affordable.
But computing was invented to solve wartime problems of various kinds, including ballistic calculations, warhead design, cryptography, and intelligence analysis.
Almost immediately it moved into corporate accounting and reporting, and commercial science and engineering.
It took thirty years for it become "personal." Its roots are corporate and military, and it was never - ever - suddenly going to give those up.
Worse, a lot of open/free/etc "solutions" are built by people who like tinkering, for other people who like tinkering. That's fine when you're making an OS for a web server, but a disaster if you want technology that's open from the POV of the average non-technical user.
You can just about, now, start to imagine an anti=internet which is distributed, secure, non-corporate, and controlled by ordinary non-technical people telling smart agents what to do.
That might, just about, with many caveats (it's not hard to think of them), become a technological solution that builds a true decentralised network.
But for now we're stuck with corporate centralisation. And that's not going to be fixed by going back to 8-bit micros, or with a Linux phone.