A voice from the past?

Although I wouldn't consider myself a follower of David Spangler, I kind of like the guy and his books. Perhaps he appeals to my softer hippy side, or perhaps I just happen to like his non-dogmatic, non-sectarian approach to spirituality. Spangler's teachings, or rather his approach to spiritual matters, is a kind of "New Age with a human face" (and without the crystals!), or a more comprehensible version of Theosophy-Anthroposophy-Alice Bailey Thought.

Yet, I admit that "Facing the future", published just three years ago, struck me as too soft, too much pie-in-the-sky, and just too anachronistic. It seems Spangler is forever stuck in the late 1960's and early 1970's, when the New Age was all about planetary consciousness, evolutionary transformation through Spirit, and a new synthesis between science, technology and spirituality. And, of course, Findhorn. Ah, those were the days! "Facing the future" is Spangler's attempt to orient himself in the new and somewhat grimmer realities of the 2010's, with peak oil, climate change, economic crises and U.S. political paralysis as some of the ingredients. I don't think he succeeds very well. Spangler is a personal friend of John Michael Greer, and the first chapters of "Facing the future" sound like a synthesis of Spangler and Greer, but as the story proceeds, Greer's peak oil predictions and pessimistic view of history are relegated to the background in favour of Aquarian Age-as-usual. More Spangler than Spengler, to crack a joke! Spangler is also a long-time friend of Stewart Brand, a recent apostate from the Green movement who has come out in favour of big cities, nuclear power and genetic engineering in his "Whole Earth Discipline". In the end, he seems to prefer Brand to Greer.

Spangler does criticize both negative apocalypticism and "positive" utopianism, two perspectives which really co-exist very well, with the spiritual elite creating Utopia after the chaff of humanity (most people) have been removed or killed in some gruesome catastrophy. However, his own perspective has certain similarities with precisely the perspective he disaffirms. Thus, Spangler mentions two visions of a possible future, in which a large amount of humanity seems to have disappeared (died out?), various cataclysms has changed the face of our planet, with the survivors living in a utopian society based on free energy and anti-gravity. One of the visions is his own, the other came to one of his neo-shamanistic friend. It's almost as if Spangler doesn't realize that the sneak peeks into our future are really just a version of the cultish apocalypticism he wants to get away from! And while free energy and anti-gravity would be cool, I don't think we have the time, nor even the energy, to invent and diffuse it - nor, probably, the wisdom to use it. Imagine a destructive civilization getting its hands on *free* energy!

Still, I recommend "Facing the future". Many other ideas in the book are interesting, although I suspect avid readers of Spangler's works will have encountered them before. Thus, Spangler rejects the notion that the spirits are "higher" or "better" than us. Rather, the spirit-beings are our equals, want to become co-creators with us, and are striving to establish a working relationship with us. The goal is not the disappearance of the material universe, but rather a synthesis, a "natural" universe open to energies from the subtle realms (Spangler's term for the spirit-world). In one sense, humans are "higher" than other physical organisms, but not because we are more intelligent, but rather because of our capacity to consciously love and empathize with other creatures than ourselves, including with Earth itself. This explains why the spirits of the subtle realms are interested in our evolution and strive to aid us. Spangler believes that miracles happen when humans (or humans and spirit-beings) get together in mutually loving relationships, creating a kind of energy vortex in which the "miraculous" emerges. Thus, if a larger portion of humanity would enter into a relationship with the subtle realms, Earth itself might begin to change.

However, Spangler is sufficiently realistic to point out that humans have destroyed the environment so much that not even the spirit-beings could heal all of it, and that any "miraculous" energy transfers to, say, save the polar ice caps would simultaneously drain some other part of the system of needed energy. Are we willing to take that risk? (Note that Spangler has a pretty "naturalist" view even of spiritual-cosmic energies.) Spangler further writes that Earth (Gaia) doesn't *really* need us humans to thrive or "become conscious". Gaia already has a form of consciousness and can take care of herself even without our fantastic stewardship, thank you!

In the end, however, Spangler is simply too optimistic as a person to really contemplate a negative future. His optimism sometimes gets the better of him, as when he claims that multinational companies or even world wars really play a positive role in bringing people together. His uncritical attitude to Brand is another example. Spangler is enthusiastic about the Internet, too, but how long will the net last in a severe energy crisis? I hope that Dave is right, but, frankly, the grumpy Spenglerisms of John Michael the Archdruid strike me as more realistic. And Greer is one of the moderates of the post-peak scene!

Still, I wish David Spangler good luck back there, somewhere in the Age of Aquarius... When the chips are down, we all have to face the future together.