Non-free market agriculture, on the other hand, has a pretty sorry historical record with no evidence that it was more sustainable or equitable.
Additionaly, you can say the system is working great now, but if it's only doing so by pushing off externalities in an unsustainable way into the future in a forseeable manner, that does not mean the system is doing a great job
I'm not sure how you define "famine", but many people have been malnourished since; some are right now AFAIK. Think of the Great Depression, for example, for a much greater scale problem. I would bet some have starved.
But most of all, any research you have would be appreciated; I feel like everyone, including me, is a bit naked out here.
An insightful way to look at it; thanks. However, the question at hand isn't about the average, but the low end: Was there malnutrition or starvation? Yes, there was and is.
EDIT: See this post for some numbers:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13298775
I'm not debating whether free market food works very well for 90% in wealthy countries (just a guess at a number) and far better than whatever was done in the 18th century, but that doesn't mean we should call it sufficient or the 'best of all possible worlds'. If millions (tens of millions?) of people in wealthy countries and (hundreds of millions? billions?) in other countries are not getting sufficient food, that's failure - just less failure than we experienced before.