I knew about Satoshi's 2008 e-mail, it is Satoshi, not the White Paper, not Bitcoin to be specific.
They aren't different things.
And if we are to be pedantic then the 7.5 pages of abstraction and simplification known as white paper doesn't represent the reality of Bitcoin either. The code does, and from the code it is obvious that parallelism and scaling (specifically nonce+extra nonce instead of only nonce or limiting it to a bigger nonce size that would be exhausted in a couple of years as hashrate grew) for much higher hashrate is envisioned.
As of your sharing argument:
Sharing is good, I used to be a socialist for a long time, I love sharing, but not the centralized way, I hate centralization and pools are centralized, simple.
I agree but that is a different discussion than whether or not Satoshi knew about it happening.
Once you got 3 huge players possessing like 75%+ of votes, you are doomed simply because they could easily collide, like by setting up a meeting or calling each other, couldn't they?
They couldn't do anything apart from perform
a one time 51% attack.
They won't be able to sustain the attack since the miners would leave immediately protecting their investment.
They also won't be able to make any changes in the protocol.
No, it is the exact, direct definition of slavery,
I don't think you know what "slavery" means.
there are issues waiting to be fixed for years,
Issues don't fix themselves. Those who see the issue must do something about it.
I invite you to start working on a proposal to address the issue and write a better mining pool software to be used by pools and the miners who connect to them in order to give more power/control to the miners.