wouldn't it be fair to assume that the laws of physics are as "true" as truth can get? We haven't found any reason to assume the laws don't conform with reality, so why reject it?

No you're not annoying at all. So I agree on a metaphysical level we can't actually know anything 100%. I also agree that truth can restrict liberty. So is it the case that some form of truth simply isn't real? Like we can test theories for example like gravity, and the laws have never changed so 1/

Truth as I used it simply means what is observable in reality like scientific truth for instance. Truth by this definition doesn't pertain to the topic of Absurdism because observable phenomena doesn't say anything about what you "ought" to do if that makes sense.

The best option you have is to live as if having a "purpose" or not is irrelevant to your existence or your desires. You should live outside the constraints of meaning and meaninglessness, and instead live authentically and freely. To live for yourself, for life itself.

Meaninglessness is also a trap, as it holds your desires hostage and declares your own existence as being undesirable and thus offers you suicide to resolving the "problem" of existence without purpose. Both options should be rejected as they subordinate your desires, and contradict reality 4/

In practice this means that meaning (religion, the state, society, ect), is only a distraction from meaninglessness and instead shackles you to the ground to keep you from living outside of its illusionary narrative as to how you "ought" live. 3/

Absurdism how I currently define it, is the recognition of the juxtaposition between beings that seek purpose/meaning and the purposeless/meaningless environment they live in, and instead of being enslaved to one or the other, you choose to live outside the constraints of meaning and meaningless. 2/

Just now getting back to you on this. It will be challenging to give you a precise answer for some of my thoughts on Absurdism because I'm trying to work on a kind of synthesis of Camus' Absurdism and Egoism as described by Max Stirner. I think the two philosophies can inform each other in a way. 1/

Obfuscation of the truth is necessary for simplistic meta-narratives because the truth will rear its head in the face of its challenge and in order to continue the simplicity of the narrative it must be suppressed

You're 100% right about MAGA being a simplification and (in my opinion) obfuscation of reality. Many people seek out simple explanations for why things are the way they are, and MAGA provides that sense of simplicity and security, despite any truth value.

It turns out that creatures that are overly cautious about dark caves are more likely to survive and reproduce than the ones that aren't afraid of dark caves. I don't think that evolution always favors truth vs untruth. Evolution just needs to create advantages to the survival of a creature.

For example, it might be more evolutionarily advantageous for a human to be scared of dark and deep caves because there might be something dangerous in there. That response isn't based on any actual truth about whether there is actually anything dangerous in there, it's simply emotive.

I have a more heterodox interpretation of Absurdism than most people so if you're interested I can elucidate separately. I don't think we are "evolutionarily driven" to find "truth". There's nothing about evolution that favors truth more than untruth, it's simply about what survives and propagates.

I say that in the past we were human, in the present we are human, and in the future we will remain human. This means we will continue to subordinate our true desires through idealization.

We look into the past and dehumanize past cultures by saying, "How despicable it is to think and act like so", while thoughtlessly being carried by the winds of societal norms, blindly adhering to untruths that destroy entire communities, and restrict the freedoms of individuals.