xbn .

This essay takes taboo as a critical term to trace the history of our modern present and as a conceptual companion with which to think through the complex entanglement of the ethical, the theological, and the political.

In popular usage today, the word “taboo” seems to explain everything and nothing. On the one hand, it points to something ultimate, sacred, and inviolable. Yet it also seems to be intimately linked to danger, prohibition, and transgression. It is precisely due to this mysterious amphiboly that the term warrants the attention of political theology. This essay takes taboo as a critical term to trace the history of our modern present and as a conceptual companion with which to think through the complex entanglement of the ethical, the theological, and the political.


The word “taboo” entered the English language via Victorian protestant voyageurs who documented Polynesian customs, among others. The diary of Captain Cook, for instance, contains entries on indigenous “tabu” interdictions that referred to things sacred, dangerous, and unclean. Although early ethnological studies on its various forms concluded that taboos were senseless vestiges of the past, later theories rejected such evolutionist arguments in favor of functionally and structurally informed conceptions of society, psychology, and culture.  

The father of sociology, Emile Durkheim, for instance, drew on Polynesian taboos to explain the significance of the word “sacred” that Europe inherited from the Roman law. He saw the process of sacralization as involving the withdrawal of certain things from their otherwise ordinary use. The withdrawn status of the object, in turn, necessitates the imposition of various interdictions that bring about and maintain its sacrality. Thus, his influential definition of religion as “a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden” already establishes taboo as foundational to the emergence of two ontologically different yet mutually inseparable realms of human experience. Taboos, in other words, lie at the heart of such binaries as the separation between religion and politics – binaries that are as conceptual as they are existential.

Freud, on the other hand, put forth another paradigm in which taboos mediate the intimate relationship between individual psyche and civilizational affect. Reading the Greek myth of Oedipus alongside the ethnologic data on the cross-cultural regulation of sexual behavior, he explores the widespread modern horror invoked by incest, even if no one can exactly explain this horror. He examines this in terms of the son’s contradictory feelings: love toward his mother on the one hand, and jealousy toward his father on the other. The contradiction, he suggests, was resolved in primordial times through the act of killing the father, but this act immediately triggered the paroxysm of other feelings such as shame, guilt, and atonement. This logic allows Freud to advance a controversial view in which the Oedipus complex, as an archive of repressed desires, forms the basis of the social and, by extension, of the political order.

Taboos are not only defined by their violation; they are also said to produce in offenders certain symbolic states of disability that are relieved by means of purification. Taking clues from the work of Durkheim, British sociologist Mary Douglas seeks to understand the logic behind defilement and purification rituals that are found across historic as well as cultural differences. In her now-classic Purity and Danger, she suggests that dirt is never an isolated phenomenon. This is because matter becomes meaningful as dirt only through the organization of the surrounding environment according to some sort of taxonomy about how things should stand in the world. Defining dirt simply yet elegantly as “matter out of place,” she puts forward yet another insightful paradigm by drawing attention both to the primacy and to the limits of such processes as classifying, ordering and organizing that produce categories of dirt, taboo, and anomaly in the first place. Although politics is not quite her concern, her argument is nevertheless quite relevant because the governance of people and things quite often involves these processes.


Each in their own way, these sociological, psychological, and cultural approaches establish an analytical paradigm in which taboos mark thresholds and mediate various boundaries of representational and existential significance. Prohibitions, in other words, potentiate closure, authorize rejection, and invoke banishment. Therefore, prohibitions not only justify politics, they found it, though not so much by secularizing the political field as by producing distinctions that merge the religious and the political. And it is the analysis of these distinctions that makes taboo a critical term for political theology.

One might begin with the role that taboos play in making the basic distinction between the self and the other. This is the focus of Julia Kristeva’s work. Building on the psychoanalytic approach of Freud and the taxonomical symbolism of Douglas, Kristeva elaborates abjection as a bodily and affective ground within and against which that distinction occurs. For her, various abominations in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament do not simply correspond to the purity/pollution binary but mark various semiotic and psychological separations as a result of which order, speech, and subject emerge. The process is far from being linear, however, as her attention to the role of the feminine in the tale of Oedipus introduces an ironic loop where abjection to the other is actually the condition of us becoming others to ourselves. Insofar as horror, disgust, and repulsion are necessary by-products of this process, Kristeva seeks to capture the profoundly gendered register of the psychological and, one can argue, political conflict with the other.

If Kristeva looks at the individual desire to separate, the founder of the mimetic theory René Girard examines the collective desire to imitate. Learning through imitation, of course, is a powerful force of socialization for kids, but Girard is interested in how wanting what others have also creates competition and rivalry among adults. In Violence and the Sacred, he contends that rivalry creates situations of intense conflict as it is fraught with the breaking down of social hierarchies and the flattening of differences. Girard does not naturalize differences but seeks to understand the mob mentality and organized violence; the fewer differences there are within the mob, the more those differences are displaced on the figure of the scapegoat. This casts the Christian myth of the sacrificial victim in a radically different light: its redemptive power comes not from the fact that the victim volunteered to be killed, but because killing the victim was a cathartic release of mob violence. The society survives precisely because of the interdiction on subsequent killing and destruction, hence the cultural significance of taboos. Thus, if Kristeva reads taboo as producing the violence of separation, Girard sees taboo as an ethical antidote to mimetics of violence and political scapegoating.

Another influential French theorist, George Bataille, on the other hand, draws inspiration from Freudian psychology to bear upon the links between taboo and the politics of its transgression. In The Accursed Share, his magnum opus on the economy of excess, Bataille also understands taboos as aiming to combat violence, but this is because they withdraw things from the realm of life and production for the purposes of sacrifice, excessive destruction, or exuberant consumption. In this logic, taboos do not so much prohibit certain practices as sort them into different domains of human existence: the domain of work, defined by utility, and the realm of sacrifice, where people indulge in everything that utility forbids – ecstatic excess, careless expenditure, violent destruction. Indulging in the forbidden allows one to go beyond the cultural, lose one’s identity and establish an intimacy with the world that brings about what Bataille calls the inner experience. Transgression, then, does not violate the taboo but suspends it for the sake of excess. The link between religious sacrifice and expenditure extends the significance of taboo into the realm of the political economy, but, above all, Bataille reveals a striking structural (and therefore political) complicity between taboo and its transgression.

This complicity is brought into its logical apotheosis in the work of Giorgio Agamben, who sees prohibition as defining the relationship between politics and life. Like Girard, he is also interested in the sacrificial victim, though for him it is not the social scapegoat, but the obscure legal category of homo sacer whose life can’t be sacrificed and yet can be killed without incurring homicide. This obscurity is explained by the paradox of sovereignty that transcends positive law by its authority to suspend it. Since Agamben follows Schmitt in defining sovereignty not by law but by the decision on it, such concepts like violation or transgression lose their explanatory purchase altogether as law and its exception exchange meanings. The exception, in other words, no longer contradicts the rule but establishes the very grounds of its validity. Agamben thus draws our attention to a series of paradoxes that constitutes the sphere of the political: the relation of inclusive exclusion, indistinction of law that is distinctive to it, exteriority that is internal to law as well as exposure to law by means of being abandoned by it. Revealing these logics of sovereignty inherited from Roman law, Agamben rejects the Durkheimian theory of the sacred as tabooed but venerated. For him, this ambivalence is a later, largely interpretive rendition of what marks the fundamental biopolitical threshold between bare living and a form of life.


The studies discussed so far ground taboo in the history of humanity in terms of its ambiguous amphiboly (sacred/unclean). Yet, given the power dynamics and hierarchies that separate the European context of knowledge formation from the so-called primitive people who practice taboos, one might legitimately ask to what extent this ambiguity has to do with the word itself. Might this ambiguity be indicative of the discursive threshold this indigenous word had to cross to become a category of social analysis? How should one conceptualize taboo, or similar prohibitions for that matter, without reading meaning into them? This question becomes all the more important if we are to take taboo as a critical term of political theology.

To that end, the work by anthropologist Franz Steiner, whose lectures on taboo were published posthumously, develops a highly insightful methodological approach. Indebted to Mauss and Wittgenstein, Steiner notices that the scientific endeavor to establish taboo as a category of cross-cultural validity distorts the complexity of individual phenomena. This, he argues, ends up constructing non-Western societies as primitive and the West as secular and superior to them. To avoid this, he proposes starting from an analysis of danger instead. He defines danger as “a socially unformulated threat” or, counterintuitively, as power. Taboo, then, is not danger in itself but points to potentially dangerous situations by triggering the mechanism of avoidance behavior. It is this relation between danger and restrictive behavior that, Steiner argues, should be studied in each given case.

An illustrative example of his method may be found in his earlier writing, “On the Process of Civilisation.” In it, he shows that an Eskimo individual can live warmly in the world of snow and travel unharmed on his light kayak through the dangerous realm of icebergs, winds, and ocean waves because he knows where danger is and how to avoid it. Steiner goes on to compare this to the Western civilization that, in the name of adapting to nature, has actually expanded the borders between society and danger in a way that danger now penetrates society. Writing on the eve of the Holocaust, he gives an example of the concentration camp where life is fully permeated by violence and danger precisely because the perpetrators knew no ethical limits. It is the society, he says, that now becomes the source of its own danger, and he laments how trivial thunderstorms look when compared to bomb raids. The relevancy of his approach for political theology, therefore, lies in its coming closest to formulating taboo as a form of socio-political life rather than taking it as a symbol of something else.

The insight of this largely neglected methodology opens up different avenues of political and theological inquiry into the topic of taboo. For instance, in a study on medieval tolerantia, historian István Bejczy observes that the Church tolerated Jews, Muslims, infidels, and prostitutes precisely because it condemned their rites. Here, tolerantia is religiously prescribed due to the social and political practices that the medieval Church considered taboo, to use a now thoroughly modern formulation. The medieval tolerantia, in other words, was a form of behaviour in the face of danger that allowed the Church to get along with differences rather than exclude them. This is not to say that it tolerated everything, but prohibition as founding tolerantia does complicate the modern influential paradigm according to which prohibition necessarily leads to abandonment. It is thus imperative that we investigate the theological-political topoi of taboo while also being attentive to the complicated conceptual genealogy of the term in critical theory.

Annotated bibliography

Agamben, G. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1998

A sweeping critical account of the constitution of modern life through such categories as exclusion and abandonment in the face of law. The book is also a precursor to his study on the sovereignty of exception – another category of Western political thought that spins off from the ambiguous notions of taboo.

Douglas M. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, Routledge, 2002.

Along with showing how seemingly senseless taboos serve to maintain social order, this work also contains many insights into the political significance of such cultural categories as danger, risk and uncertainty.

Girard, R. Violence and the Sacred, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1977.

The text traces a complicated relationship between taboo and violent social behaviour in order to expound the theory of mimesis.   

Kristeva, J. Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection, Columbia University Press, 1984.

The book draws on theories of taboo to establish abjection as a central affective element of modern society. It analytically connects psychological responses to things that disturb boundaries and identities with profoundly traumatic experiences of otherness, othering and discrimination.

Steiner, F. B. Taboo, Truth and Religion, Selected Writings, Edited and with Introduction by Jeremy Adler and Richard Fardon. Berghahn Books. 1999.

This book is not only a case study of taboo, but also offers a brave methodology of cross-cultural analysis of indigenous categories that seeks to avoid the epistemological blindfolders of Western canon. The intriguing implications of this methodology can also be seen in Steiner’s controversial work on slavery, also included in the volume.  


Native survivance, in [Gerald] Vizenor’s parlance, is a combination of the words “survival” and “resistance,” and it “creates a sense of presence.” According to him, “The suffix -ance designates a condition, a nature, or a quality that is more than a mere description of survival.”


Where relationality is most productive in critical projects is where it transcends its projects of critique and explores the possibilities—ethical, political, and theological—of its account of subjectivity and community.


Facing the violence of contemporary terror, many intellectuals have spoken in our present times about a return of political theology and religion in its violent forms. Attention to the concept of martyrdom has reappeared due to an increasing interest in religious conflicts.


In autopoiesis, there is no separation between what we do and the particular way in which the world appears to us.


Where state sovereignty as theology would have subjected groups accept their condition with its attending violence and suffering, the micro sovereignty I propose here – not merely as a futuristic idea, but more as a reflection on how subjected groups have dealt with subjection – invites us not to accept that violence and suffering, but to find creative ways out of it through the cracks of Empire.


Abolition is a process of imagining alternatives to the settler colonial, carceral present; it requires modes of kinship and care to replace prisons and policing.

Gratuitous Violence

Signifying a critical homology between the fields of Black studies and political theology, gratuitous violence is an important keyword for interrogating how religio-political concepts can afford unique insights into issues of slavery, race, and the human which continue to inform our world today.  


Asian American literary criticism’s analysis of contemporary orientalisms centered around the figuration of Asian subjectivities reminds political theologians that unconscious (white) fear and fascination with the Orient still guides political and theoretical engagement with the Asian “other.”


Thing as concept can be helpful to elucidate the specific yet ambiguous interaction of the religious and the political. Using recent thingly theoretical work within these two spheres, with an emphasis on body and shape, I will suggest ways through which thing (and things and thingness) both clarifies and challenges that interaction.


Diaspora might be a problem for political progressives for the very reason that it is so alluring. Diaspora promises both freedom and connection: freedom from national borders or the essentialisms of race and language, connection between people who affirm shared memory and heritage.
But heritage is never really free.


If there is one thing that can be said about blackness, it is this: blackness is unruly.

Black Reason

Black reason is propelled by a fantastic imaginary, a changeling animus that aggregates and transmogrifies the desires and fears of whiteness.

Racial Capitalism

The historical and theoretical relationships between race and capitalism are internally contested and in need of further exploration from theologians and scholars of religion.


Sometimes referred to as “population control,” other times “better breeding,” eugenics has been seen as a religious solution to social ills, and sometimes a new religion unto itself.


Gilroy’s “planetary humanism” contributes to political theology by offering more than a critique: in his work, humanism is a starting point, a concept to guide multicultural political projects today.


Official responses to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have encouraged us to understand risk in individual terms. They’re wrong: risk is all about interdependence.

Food Sovereignty

Food sovereignty represents a refusal of a globally commodified food system in favor of systems and institutions that support self-sufficient communities.


Doxa is a term used in sociology to contend with belief and orthodoxy without reducing either to behavior or cognition. It explores disposition and embodied belief—the gut sense of the world which is acquired through practice rather than discourse.

Settler Colonialism

I propose Decolonial Settler Theology as a contextual political theology that is uniquely the task of the settler, who must face their own complicity in narratives of ongoing colonization and aim at their undoing.


In an era during which police institutions and ideology are so fundamental to our cultural common-sense, how can theologians and critical theorists challenge this form of power?


This essay takes taboo as a critical term to trace the history of our modern present and as a conceptual companion with which to think through the complex entanglement of the ethical, the theological, and the political.


What is still nascent… is an explicit conversation between political theology and critical theories of affect, particularly in a way that might contribute to constructive projects. The sort of political theology that might emerge from such collaboration would consider how affective regimes intersect with theological constructions or religious performances.


While kinship has traditionally held a vibrant conceptual life in anthropological inquiry, more recent studies on kinship as a form of spiritual relationality have opened up a new space of interdisciplinary exploration for political theology.


The modern state form itself is inextricable from the commandement, not just as an emblem for sovereignty in Schmitt’s sense, but also because the exemplary political form of modernity, the nation-state, has racist and exclusionary tendencies that can be understood as political-theological transfers of monotheistic principles.


That structural violence is always also relational, proximate, and personal is, perhaps, one of the core insights that the concept of mourning brings to the fore for political theology.


The conversation about nature’s personhood and rights is always political, often legal, and sometimes theological. Most importantly, it is a localized conversation about the boundaries of a given community – who is part of the community and who isn’t.


For political theology, we might find ourselves compelled by practices that seek to connect us with our ecologies, our communities, and our relations with ourselves – in ways that are more about humility and provisionality than finding cures or solutions.


Queer, I think, should remain different, differing, dissonant, and plural. It shouldn’t contract or calcify into anything singular or solid.


If theorizations of care are to more directly address the current “crisis of care,” we need not only to prioritize the kinds of embodied, particularized care that care ethics has highlighted in the past, but to explore a wider range of caring relationships and their diverse structures.


A preliminary question for political theology is how to understand the meaning and significance of matter. The response to this question shapes how a political theology does or doesn’t engage political economy and theological tradition.


The triangulation of money, sovereignty, and divinity is a good point of entry to study the mutual constitution of theological and political concepts and the questions about ultimate value and social form that they raise.


Refusal is a strong current resisting the structure of settler colonialism. It crashes, churns, and erodes the death-dealing dams of settler knowing. Its path turns away from the settler’s gaze.


Seva lends itself to easy appropriation across political and religious contexts, while also furnishing mutually intelligible tropes of service, welfare, and social betterment.


Political theology intimately understands that given reality teems with forms of life that remain opaque to us.


Spillers, Cheng, and Halberstam provide us with tools to approach the histories of violence, economics, relationships, desires, and contestation that infuse our experiences with flesh in its multiplicity. Flesh is never neutral.


It is not always possible (or advisable) to separate the “political” from the “religious” or “cultural” in Indigenous contexts. Indeed, all of these are concepts developed by outsiders to describe Indigenous life. Instead, Indigeneity invites scholars of political theology and related fields to consider the relationships between these threads of cultural life.


As we watch the illusion that was Man fall apart, we also see these more-than-human worlds that Man called “animal” disrupting and revealing the cracks and fractures in his own divine intentions.

Temporality I: History

William Apess, like Walter Benjamin a century later, sought to shift the paradigms of society with history and theology as orienting poles for colonial critique. Anticipating Benjamin, Apess looked to those who had been wrecked by the advance of colonialism as the grounding site for historical and political theological inquiry.

Temporality II: Futurity

Both Benjamin and Apess discern that historical narratives are imbricated with notions of futurity, that is, which bodies and polities are allowed to inhabit and thrive within the temporality in which the “not yet” and the “always already” co-constitute each other.


In this short essay, written from my perspective as a Jewish feminist, I draw together a plurality of engagements with natality to engender new conversations in political theology.

Critical Race Theory

CRT is a framework or an approach to understanding the way racism is foundational to systems of judicial, political, social, cultural, religious, and theological power.


[S]ituating demonology more fully in its religious and theological contexts furnishes resources that not only nuance understandings of movements for whom demonization is central, but also recontextualize discussions of core political theological concepts, including sovereignty, power, economy, subjectivity, and freedom.


From Myanmar to Mariupol, from the streets of Memphis to the waves and winds of the Mediterranean Sea: resistance to violence takes many forms. So does political protest against precarity. At which point does the unavoidable vulnerability of the living condition come to expression as political agency? Can such precarious politics constitute or configure an alternative community?

Hunger Strike

“Instead of neatly separating the forms of resistance to biosovereignty into life-affirming struggles and necroresistance and mapping them (and life and death) onto the reform/revolt dichotomy, I suggest that we conceive life and death as relational rather than oppositional categories. For every differentiation and intensification of death creates new possibilities of life; and every differentiation and intensification of life entails experiences of “death” that cannot be reduced to the power of one’s death.”

Like what you're reading?

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Share This

Share this post with your friends!