Thanks for sharing your sense of this. Here is how I see it. To put it bluntly, man is meant to be a spiritual coupler. That is how we interact with the realm of the spirit. That is the purpose for which we were created. (And that is why we do not have eyes to see, nor ears to hear, nor a tongue to express the realm of spirit in our walk both Earthly and fallen. Beyond perhaps a very unperceiving stumbling around, we perceive as by the spirit with whom our spirit is coupled.) Like Jung, Grandpierre is attempting to deny that. As with Jung though, there are beings that don't mind this, as long as the subject is made available.
Parts of the Church are stumbling around in much the same kind of experimentation that At.Gr. is flip-flopping in and I've been one of those who has done so. Now, the Lord will make Himself known as He will and I do believe He is limbering and warming up quite a few Christians, including in "empirical" ways of relating. But at the same time, there are "different devils for different levels," as I've heard it put in charismatic circles and the spirit is terrain of spirits, more than a mere 'home field advantage.' That terrain is not a realm for walking blindly --including the blindness of braces on brain and blinkers on eyes that you've referred to elsewhere. What good does it do, to gain spiritual sensitivity while maintaining a "modern" or "materialist" denial of the persons (spirits) that one attracts? That, to say nothing of the denying the Spirit who waits on the side, as a gentleman will.
AG is not a materialist, unspun. Obviously, based on the quotes Milum takes from an essay he wrote nearly 20 years ago, he was engaged in efforts to revitalize spirit in Hungary, particularly among its youth, because the official regime there was (a) into social, cultural, and mind control; and (b) denied any scope to spirit beyond what the state was able to control. Shamanpunk was a way "to blow the doors off" repressed spirit, and demonstrate to individuals the reality of their own spirit and personality, after 40 years intellectual, moral, and spiritual flattening by the official state. AG's efforts in this regard commenced in 1978, well before the Hungarian communist regime fell, in 1990. There was danger to him in taking such risks. But he helped to make a cultural revolution inside Hungary that most likely contributed to the collapse of the state in critical ways.
Grandpierre is neither a materialist nor an atheist. His concern for his home country is that it can emerge from the devastation of Soviet-style communism into a post-modern, liberal (in the classical sense) state that respects the liberty and dignity of each Hungarian, under a system of ordered liberty and equal justice similar to our own.
But Hungary has to build such a future out of her own unique cultural resources, two of which are discussed by Milum: the Christian Church and Hungary's ancient folk culture and folklore/poetry.
I certainly wish Hungary Godspeed in the realization of a just and open civil society.