Political Theology Unit

2026 AAR Annual Meeting CFP: Political Theology Unit

Is the future authoritarian? 

• The Schmittian legacy of “political theology” has frequently led to an assumption that recognizing the interrelation of the political and the theological reveals the necessity of decisive authority at the core of the political. However, this view is attached to very specific conceptual and historical articulations of what both theology and politics entail. We invite proposals that descriptively attend to actually-existing, historically-grounded theological dimensions of politics (and vice versa) – especially beyond Christianity and Europe – that present compelling, concrete alternatives to authoritarian models.
• There has been an emerging discourse linking the rise of authoritarianism and ethno-nationalism to the consequences of 'endless critique' invited by liberal, individuating models of discourse. In particular, so this argument goes, the critique of Western civilization has led to a crisis of trust in longstanding institutions (from universities to governing bodies to churches) that function to protect social goods, thus motivating a turn toward older hierarchical models of authority. We invite proposals on case studies that complicate this claim. What are models for enabling stability, flourishing, and freedom of inquiry beyond either liberal individualism or authoritarianism?

AI, Technogovernance, and the Human (for possible co-sponsorship with Ethics Unit)
A key buzzword for AI ethics is “alignment,” especially in the wake of Brian Christian’s 2020 book The Alignment Problem. The idea is that any artificial intelligence should be aligned to human values. That’s an admirable (if vague) goal, but as OpenAI admits, “Aligning AI systems with human values also poses a range of other significant sociotechnical challenges, such as deciding to whom these systems should be aligned.” AI cannot be aligned to human values, but always humans’ values, and presumably the values held by a powerful minority. We invite proposals in political theology or religious ethics (both broadly understood) on the question of technology governance and the ways developments in AI research and usage interact with existing power dynamics and differing values. Possible directions could include the following:

• What theological resources might help us grasp the operation of power and mode of governance anticipated by the widespread use of AI and LLMs?
• How can humanism (in its classical or contemporary human-rights forms) or posthumanism (particularly in its eco- or materialist forms) clarify the ethics of technology governance?
• How might our fields help us to articulate the human over and against these models, both in response to the question of "alignment" and to the question of the kind of "human" guidance or oversight that AI/LLMs continue to require?

The future of higher education: civilization or memory?
Education is a crucial third term operating within historical accounts of political theology insofar as pedagogical practices materially mediate both theological and political sensibilities to leaders, larger publics, societies. Scholars of religion generally recognize the troubling civilizing and violent role that higher education has played, particularly (though not exclusively) in colonial contexts. At the same time, universities have the institutional resources to preserve what is old – languages, archives, texts – making them a target for actors who want to erase or flatten the complexities of collective memory. We invite proposals that consider the role of higher education in the current theo-political context, mindful both of the historical dangers of civilizing strategies alongside the value of preservation and contestation.

The Concept of the Family and the Future
Feminist and queer theorists have long shown that the family is not merely a benign or natural unit but a political form that organizes power. As feminist critique has emphasized, the family naturalizes hierarchies, privatizes care, and domesticates belonging in ways that make social violence reproducible at the most intimate scale. These dynamics often run parallel to the formation of the nation itself. Queer critique deepens this analysis by challenging the temporal and affective horizons that the family enforces. Lee Edelman’s rejection of heteronormative temporality (reproductive futurism), for instance, questions the figure of the Child as an anchor of political imagination premised on redemptive, productivity-driven futures. We invite proposals that interrogate the conceptual, political, and theological force of the family in shaping visions of the future.