>If this is your standard for a relaxing “chilled out” lifestyle then I’m afraid you’d be deeply disappointed if you saw the realities of living like this.

Not my standard, the standard presented by the previous poster, where getting food/water/shelter is "chilling" and doing that plus conquering etc is the "less chill" version.

I wasn't explaining why the heart of Africa is "chilled out." I was explaining why at least the initial waves of people with guns who spent an inordinate amount of their "chill time" scheming on how to conquer others, didn't bother much with inner central Africa, thus even if they were chilling they were a bit safer from western ships and guns.

I don't think I ever made the claim all of the heart of africa is just chillin. I'm explaining why there is the potential people in some places could focus more on just eating and sheltering and watering and not as much time fighting against people who spend time on gunpowder and ships. All else equal it should cost less time to eat and shelter than to do that plus other things, and by the standards here, that was the "chill" that was relative to doing all that plus worrying about conquering.

>>Those human tribes who just chilled out after meeting the bare requirements of survival died off because some greedy assholes outcompeted them

>If this is your standard for a relaxing “chilled out” lifestyle then I’m afraid you’d be deeply disappointed if you saw the realities of living like this.

What you've done is redefined chilling out, from what the OG poster had it at (basically food + shelter), and instead you're arguing against someone else that their original definition we were already working on is wrong.