The Internationalist Vision of Black Theology and Black Power Toward a Theology of Solidarity with Palestinians

Abstract

In the postscript to her autobiography, revolutionary activist and writer Assata Shakur wrote, “Any community seriously concerned with its own freedom has to be concerned about other peoples’ freedom as well. The victory of oppressed people anywhere in the world is a victory for Black people. Each time one of imperialism’s tentacles is cut off we are closer to liberation.”ii

In August 2014, Palestinian activists demonstrated their concern for Black people’s freedom when they tweeted advice to protestors in Ferguson about how to respond to tear gas. After this striking display of solidarity, historians, scholar-activists, and political scientistsiii have sought to highlight the international coalition that’s grown, each scholar deploying their own methodological approaches to make sense of it. If the common aim of solidarity is liberation of the parties involved, as Assata Shakur suggests, it is surprising that liberation theologians, particularly black liberation theologians, have remained relatively silent within the emergent discourse on Black/Palestinian solidarity. The humble attempt of this presentation is to give voice to an incipient Black Protestant Christian theology of solidarityiv that takes seriously this internationalist phenomenon. I will argue that the internationalist vision of James Cone’s Black Theology and Black Power provides a model theological vision of transnational solidarity. Indeed, an often-overlooked aspect of Cone’s theological project is his internationalism – that is, his emphasis on the connectedness of struggles in the US and abroad. After highlighting the internationalist features of Black Theology and Black Power, I argue that its two indispensable aspects – radical identification and God’s liberative acts – are theological. From this theological basis, I suggest that Cone’s radical identification aspect serves as a constitutive piece for solidarity with victims of racist violence, displacement, and ‘imperial theologies,’ aspects uniting Palestinians, Jews, and Black Americans. However, I also argue, that the norms and paradigms of the ‘liberative’ aspect of Cone’s theological internationalism must constantly remain reclarified and reinterpreted in light of their potential to justify ethnic cleansing and colonialism.