I don't think there is such a thing as true freedom.

[Skidmore]

Nor has there ever been true freedom. It is an ideal and one which takes is definition from the culture within which it is sought. The closest we've come to defining how to achieve the ideal was the notion of separation of church and state, theoretically creating a dynamic in which some innate or inherent rights could be fostered. Even then those identified rights were not extended to all but weighted down with cultural limits. At no age in history has true freedom be actualized. What we identify as freedom is so culturally bound that it is should be referred to as simply "free agency" because the person is free to make the choices allowed by the consensus of people he/she lives amongst. It seems to me that, more often than not, how that consensus is made is is what people end up fighting over. Doesn't mean that it is an ideal not worth pursuing.

[Cirque du So-What]

1. As the saying goes

'The perfect is the enemy of the good.'

That's not to say I don't agree with your premise that true freedom is unattainable; I do. You are likely correct as well when you say that true freedom is not worth the energy exerted toward attaining it. I believe that attaining perfection is impossible, citing the law of diminishing returns.

Regardless of that, however, I still consider the pursuit of freedom a worthwhile goal, although I consider it important to recognize that ultimate freedom can never be achieved.