However, whether or not is a discussion we should be having is another point entirely.
This is not very clear as it contradicts the previous sentence.
they value more and that austerity is found in different aspects of our culture as a whole anyway.
Examples: (Native Americans to an extent) (3rd World Countries) (Hippies/Gypsies/Bohemians).
..they value more[,]
I would not argue if you included native americans in the scope of .. our culture as a whole .., maybe even gypsies and bohemieins, who are after all found almost everywhere, but I really wonder what you have in mind when you include 3rd world countries in .. our culture as a whole .. . Its a noble idea though, but I don't think people generally see it as this. It is culture
which differentiates the different worlds.
going back to an austere life leads to people wanting to become more complex and differentiated. [I had a sociology source for this argument.
why do you ask - "would it be possible for me to make the argument ..." ? Thoreau was tackling one of the deepest issues that mankind faces and it is timeless. Complex
apply to hippies and bohemians since they chose this way of life. Gypies, generally, and people in 3rd world countries live austerely, but have different reasons for doing so. Only those who would rather have more
are open to label desperate
The others though live the principle of austerity
, or are trying to, and this is what Thoreau himself was talking about.
I think people in countries that are not 3rd world would have difficulty understanding this.