I think the rejection of magic is less because of a historical suppression of witchcraft by the church, and more rooted in the Enlightenment rejection of the church’s superstition itself, and all of the horrible things done in superstition’s name to begin with - and now we just regard it as delusion, and delusion is unsavoury. Remember, the first institutions outside indigenous cultures or within them but originating from outside them to have incorporated psychedelics in them were not hospitals - they were churches, a couple in Brazil with ayahusca and one in America with peyote.

I’d tend to disagree with the natural>synth thing too. LSD, for me, is only rivaled by ayahuasca in terms of how well it allows me access to “mystical” realms. Mushrooms have never done too much for me. LSD, I woke up into white light. That is the experience that set me to pursue years in monasteries. And MDMA, arguably, is the most specific amplifier of all - it just acts as an amphetamine for affectionate brain functions. And of course, the Mesoamerican societies weren’t exactly peaceful, though they were very psychedelically involved. True, Xochipilli was unique among the Aztec gods for refusing blood sacrifice - but that didn’t stop the rest of their pantheon demanding it. Contrast this with psychedelically naive Jainism and Buddhism criticising Vedic rituals for animal cruelty, and the surrounding psychedelically-naive Hindu culture later dropping those practices. (Okay, MAYBE Soma was a psychedelic - we don’t know - but even there, Soma was Vedic - the later Himdu ahimsa ideal was a rejection of that Vedic Soma-period’s animal sacrifices - which had by then forgotten what Soma was). Like the reformed LSD evangelist Tim Scully, I’d say psychedelics are good - but probably not the savior.

All that said - I do want to emphasize this last point, to underline a very strong agreement with you. I do not think these things are non-specific amplifiers. I think they CAN amplify evil, because curse magic IS a thing in shamanism, and shamans are indeed often brutally murderous people - so they’re not totally neutral. But I do think that they are nonetheless basically amplifiers of GOOD, which can be perversely used for evil. So though I do not accept a too optimistic vision of their sociologically revolutionary potential - and I do think things like LSD aren’t “less than” - I do agree that they are good, sacred, parts of our world, and not simply neutral, even if appropriable by neutral or malicious intents. And I am happy when I meet people who agree on that point, because I think it does point to some of the magic in it