I liked this paper, it is important to show that there is a lot of naivete and stereotyping in the new age universe. I particularly like the post-modernism framing, as well as the idea that our 'identities' are not built as 'consumer products'. On the other hand, I found the text too activist and judgmental, as with its use of terms like 'plastic shamans', which dilute the power of the author's analysis. Aldred seems against everything and all regarding appropriations of Native American indian images. But we live in a hybrid world, these exchanges have been going on for decades. I think it also takes away the power of the indigenous peoples as active subjects, because some of these indians are themselves engaged in new age practices. Of course, you could argue that this is because they don't have many options (because they are oppressed and have few economic opportunities...). It also puts all kinds of new age manifestations at the same level, and there are great differences inside this field. But the main question that is left is that it is complicated to see culture as something 'essential' and 'permanent'. In the end, it seems that the author would be against change in all senses, since indigenous communities are also changing... Anyway, I suppose it is good that someone is taking this more activist discourse, it is a necessary part of the debate, too.