> Bitcoin the only thing that matters is the computing power of miners
> That is precisely the problem that Satoshi Nakamoto intended to solve, preventing Sybil attacks
"The problem" Satoshi wanted to solve is building a trustless ledger that can store real value, even if the only value is the ability to publish data uncensored and universally. Sybil attacks are an aspect of that and proof of work had already existed before Bitcoin to solve, you guessed it, Sybil attacks.
You're view of Satoshi's intentions are therefore myopic.
This is demonstrated when you conflate your quoted passage about chain reorganization with power over the network as a whole. Satoshi was sensitive to block size, so were and are all Bitcoiners. There is a reason the block size was not massive out of the gate, and in the main forks remains small: Satoshi understood that node participation was important and should not be gatekept.
In a way, that's all irrelevant. We do not need the authority of the founder to draw our own conclusions about Bitcoin or blockchain - in fact one intention of Satoshi which is plainly obvious is this fact.
Volunteer nodes absolutely contribute to decentralization of resources and power. Mining nodes have an interest in maximizing profits, while volunteer nodes have an interest in keeping the network tied to its ideology, which means not significantly changing, which is valuable for a store of value. It certainly is not a scalable model (neither is Ethereum, it just makes other trade offs), but the nodes do in fact keep check on each other.