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.
AG is not a materialist, unspun.
He comes from a culture of indoctrinated materialism, so perhaps I let that affect my word choice. But I asked you what you knew about his spirituality and if I recall you inferred that he may not admit to actual spirits... or at least not as it is revealed by God. From the reference I pulled out in this thread, he would deny spirits outside of one's own --perhaps some kind of a materialistically centered spirituality, I think --much like Jung (you have heard people attempt to describe the "anima" as if it were based upon the material element of of a being, eh?). Or, maybe AGr. is simply egocentric/agnostic in terms of the relational nature of the human spirit at its core and foundation.
People will often talk of "spirit" and "spiritual" as if it were fundamentally poetic and detached from reality, metaphoric... of something er other.... I suppose people who do are prone to do so, "calls em like they sees em," as the fabled baseball umpire said.
One is doing well when one treats subjects as tested by history --and sure, seasoned by benign cultural idiosyncracies (it's very nice to savor one's ethnicity). But in as much as this is true, one is doing best when one is affected by and deals with truth and principles themselves, free of being beholden to anyone's prior experiences and "traditions taught by men." That is when the best traditions are wrought.