Deleuze & Guattari: War
Axiom III and Proposition IX
Correlation of Nomadic War Machine and Itinerant Metallurgy
The concepts of the nomad war machine and itinerant metallurgy are intricately linked, suggesting that the movement of peoples and the processes of metallurgy are not merely contemporaneous but are interdependent phenomena.
Nature and Purpose of War
War is often mischaracterized as being solely focused on battle. It is crucial to understand that the war machine's objectives extend beyond traditional narratives of warfare.
Central Questions
Is the battle truly the primary objective of war?
Is war itself the primary function of the war machine?
How does the State apparatus interpret and utilize the war machine?
These inquiries reveal a significant ambiguity regarding the term "object," suggesting a deeper interrelation between these concepts.
Distinctions in Warfare
Understanding the nuances between various forms of war:
Pursuit of Battle: Traditional warfare often emphasizes direct confrontations, echoing historical perspectives from military theorists like General Ferdinand Foch, who championed engagements.
Avoidance of Battle: Conversely, the war machine may prioritize reflection and strategic maneuvering over physical engagement.
This distinction blurs the lines of offensive versus defensive strategies, complicating our understanding of military engagements.
Historical Perspectives
Traditionally, warfare sought total annihilation as an end goal. However, guerrilla warfare often aims for outcomes that do not strictly involve battle, challenging established norms of military success.
The evolution of combat into movements of total war further complicates the concept of battle itself, as the rapid maneuvers are tied to guerrilla strategies that resist conventional war definitions.
Objectives of the War Machine
The objectives of the war machine are multifaceted and diverge from established war paradigms:
The annihilation of the enemy is a secondary concern; instead, the war machine often pursues raids that disrupt target environments.
Originating as a nomadic invention, the war machine flourishes in smooth spaces that are essential for sustaining its existence. The foundational goal is to maintain and control these spaces as opposed to engaging in outright warfare.
Complex Relationship with the State
When confronted with States and urban environments, the war machine transforms into an apparatus of destruction, reshaping its identity: war becomes an unavoidable necessity when clashes with State structures occur.
Historical context reveals that archaic States did not initiate wars due to the absence of war machines; they relied on other mechanisms for control, like policing and imprisonment.
Over time, external war machines have catalyzed the dissolution of archaic States, prompting critical inquiries regarding how contemporary States appropriate these war machines to consolidate their own power.
Types of Appropriation Challenges
Operational Essence: The nomadic war machine faces dilemmas concerning conquered territories: should they return to nomadism or establish firm control?
Forms of Appropriation: The divergence between professional armies and conscription, or mercenaries versus territorial warriors, reveals changing dynamics.
Means of Appropriation: Taxation, territorial control, and public works directly influence military structures, affecting how war machines are utilized.
Clausewitz’s Contribution
Carl von Clausewitz famously posited that "war is a continuation of politics by other means." However, he distinguished between two types of warfare:
Ideal Pure War: This refers to an abstract concept of absolute conflict, while
Real Wars: Actual conflicts occurring under the influence of political motivations and objectives.
This dichotomy illustrates the shift from traditional conceptions to realpolitik considerations.
Transformation and Total War
Under State appropriation, the war machine's focus often transitions from a complementary role with war to one where war becomes the primary goal.
In total war, civilian resources and lives become integrated within the military effort, demanding a radical redefinition of societal roles.
Tensions rise when war supersedes state intentions, leading to models such as fascism, where war becomes self-sustaining.
The Legacy of the War Machine
The war machine exhibits a dual nature:
As a destructive force, it often conflicts with the nomadic way of life.
As a creative entity, it fosters new social relations and possibilities for interaction.
This symbiotic relationship between nomadic cultures and States reveals nuanced dynamics that echo through history: nomads often assimilate into State structures as war machines adapt according to changing circumstances and demands.
Deleuze & Guattari - Nomadology - CH2
Axiom II: The War Machine
The concept of the war machine is distinct from the traditional State apparatus and can be traced back to ancient nomadic societies. The war machine encompasses three fundamental aspects:
Three Aspects of the War Machine
Spatiogeographic Aspect: Nomads inhabit vast territories defined not just by fixed locations but by routes or customary paths that enable their mobility and access to resources.
Arithmetic or Algebraic Aspect: The organization of nomadic groups is conducted through quantitative measures, which may include the size of the group, logistical capabilities, and resource allocation.
Affective Aspect: This involves the emotions and instincts that underlie and drive the nomadic lifestyle, influencing their social structures and interactions.
Nomadic Existence and Territory
Nomadic communities define their territories not by stationary points but by paths of movement connecting vital resources like water and dwellings.
Relays vs. Fixed Points: In a nomadic lifestyle, certain points serve as relays rather than fixed territorial markers, contrasting with the rigid points seen in sedentary societies.
Nomadic vs. Migrant: Unlike migrants, who tend to move from one fixed point to another, nomads perceive their journey as continuous, seeing each halting point as part of a larger relational journey.
Space, Movement, and Territory
The nature of space occupied by nomadic communities showcases distinct characteristics:
Sedentary Space: Often striated, comprising walls, enclosures, and regulated interactions, leading to a structured and ordered social fabric.
Nomadic Space: Characterized as smooth, it allows for fluidity and adaptability in response to environmental changes, such as terrain shifts due to climate change or the encroachment of deserts.
Distinction between Speed and Movement
Speed: Represented as an intensive quality where a particular state of being fills a given space - often linked to the availability of resources or manpower.
Movement: Considered an extensive quality, which is relative and connects various points along a nomadic trajectory.
Deterritorialization and Reterritorialization
Nomadic existence facilitates a unique form of interaction with land characterized by:
Deterritorialization: This involves the establishment of fluid relationships with the land, adapting to new environments and redistributing social structures.
Reterritorialization: Occurs when nomads establish new connections with previously occupied lands, ultimately reshaping them into adaptable territories that align with nomadic practices.
Nomadism vs. State Formation
The fundamental distinctions between nomadic organization and State structures emerge as follows:
Flexible vs. Rigid Organization: Nomadic societies operate on complex interactions rather than definitive structures; this allows them to thrive in diverse environments without the need for a centralized authority.
Resistance to Striation: Nomads inherently resist the striation imposed by State mechanisms, embracing mobility as a core element of their existence. Their methods of warfare symbolize this movement, continually challenging geopolitical boundaries and traditional controls.
The Role of Numbers in War Machines
Nomadic existence necessarily involves numerical organization in warfare. Numbers are utilized beyond mere quantitative measures to include qualitative elements such as strategy or troop composition:
Historical Roots: This numerical system reflects the missteps taken from pastoral migrations, requiring coordination and sharing of information among nomadic tribes for effective military organization.
Weapons and Tools
The distinction between weapons and tools in nomadic cultures is often blurred, as they can serve multiple purposes depending on context:
Interconnection of Action and Emotion: Weapons may represent extensions of emotional states, thereby intertwining the act of war with underlying feelings of the nomads.
The Metallurgical Connection
Metallurgy emerges as a crucial component in the nomadic organizational structure, indicating both social complexity and innovation:
Role of Artisans: Metallurgists within nomadic communities assume critical roles, enhancing the mobility by providing advanced tools and weaponry while reflecting the socio-economic innovations of nomadic life.
Producers and Disseminators: Nomads are not only consumers of metal but also play a vital role in its production and dissemination, influencing both their cultures and those of sedentary societies.Deleuze & Guattari - Nomadology - CH1
Nomadology: The War Machine
Author and Publication
Authors: Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari
Originally appeared in: A Thousand Plateaus
Translated by: Brian Massumi
Published by: Wormwood Distribution, Seattle, WA, 2010
Key Propositions
Axiom I
The war machine is defined as a structure that exists outside the State apparatus, indicating a fundamental difference in the nature of warfare and power.
Proposition I
This exteriority is articulated through various cultural phenomena: mythology, epic narratives, dramatic representations, and games. These serve as mediums that express the war machine's essence and operational dynamics in societal contexts.
Political sovereignty is represented through two key figures:
Magician-king (Rex, raj): symbolizes magical powers and the charismatic authority that captivate and terrify social groups.
Jurist-priest (flamen, Brahman): embodies legal authority and the structure of governance that maintains societal order.
These dual roles, although contrasting, function together to present a complementary binary that represents a sovereign unity:
Magician-king: Often depicted as obscure, violent, quick, and fearsome, embodying the unpredictability and chaos of power.
Jurist-priest: Characterized by clarity, calmness, weightiness, and regulation, establishing rules and norms within the polity.
The Nature of the War Machine
War is conceptualized as existing beyond the confines of State apparatus, a significant departure from traditional views that associated violence strictly with State authority:
State violence can manifest through police enforcement or immediate capture, circumventing the necessity for warfare.
The integration of war into State operations occurs legally through the army, suggesting a normalization of violence as a function of governance.
The war machine emerges as a chaotic force outside of State regulation, with figures like Indra symbolizing its multiplicity and resistance to fixed structures.
Justice from the perspective of the war machine may be perceived as cruel; however, it carries an undercurrent of compassion, urging alternative relationships with power, gender, and culture.
It operates beyond binary oppositions, promoting a becoming that resists hierarchical arrangements, allowing for fluidity in social organization.
War Machine vs. State Apparatus: An Analogy in Games
Chess: A Game of State
Features fixed pieces with defined roles (knight, bishop) and structured battlefields, embodying a regulated approach to war.
Reflects a model of dominance and control inherent to State power structures.
Go: A Nomadic Game
Consists of flexible pieces which function collectively, permitting innovative strategies devoid of rigid roles and hierarchies.
Represents war that emphasizes adaptability and territorial contestation, showcasing a more fluid approach to conflict.
Both games illustrate contrasting paradigms:
Chess embodies striated space with fixed entities aiming for dominance.
Go operates within smooth space, emphasizing continuous movement and the dynamic interplay of strategies.
Historical Analysis of War and Politics
Analyzing historical myths and narratives reveals the complex relations between State power and warfare.
Example: The myth of Nkongolo and Mbidi signifies the traditional State's disruption by external military forces (notably Mbidi's army).
Clastres' Perspective asserts that primitive societies employed various mechanisms to resist the establishment of centralized State power, suggesting that war plays a critical role in maintaining social order rather than contributing to State development.
The Role of War in Society
In primitive societies, war serves as a mechanism that preserves group identities and segmentarity, acting as a barrier against State formation.
Clastres theorizes that:
War does not catalyze the development of a State; instead, it forms an integral aspect of a social state that actively opposes the establishment of hierarchical governance.
Mechanisms inherent in warfare delineate and constrain social exchanges, preventing the emergence of powerful centralized authorities.
Conclusion
Deleuze and Guattari contend that an understanding of the war machine as a framework outside State constraints can unveil new modes of sovereignty and power relations.
Nomadic thought emphasizes the importance of movement, transformation, and the necessity of creating spaces for fluid identities that defy traditional structures of power and dominance.
Deleuze - CH12 - A Thousand Plateaus - Treatise on Nomadology
Treatise on Nomadology - The War Machine
Key Concepts and Theories
The war machine exists outside of State apparatus, with mythology, epic tales, drama, and games being the first sources to discuss it. Political sovereignty operates through two archetypes: the Magician-king (Rex or Raj) and the Jurist-priest (Flamen or Brahman), which are antithetical yet complementary, forming a dual sovereignty critical for governance. In the context of mythological roots, Georges Dumezil's study refers to key Indo-European figures, highlighting that political powers often include opposing pairs such as clear/obscure and violent/calm. Importantly, war is not confined within a state and can exist independently through various means, leading to the distinction between police and warriors. As a phenomenon, the war machine predates State regulation and law.
The nature of the war machine represents a multiplicity that is capable of transformation and fluidity, contrasting with the fixed and regulated nature of State power. This is exemplified through figures like Indra, who undermine State sovereignty and build relationships with women and animals, promoting a mode of becoming that surpasses dualistic definitions.
In a comparative analysis, the games of chess and Go highlight different aspects of governance and war. Chess symbolizes State governance with its codified pieces and definitive structure, while Go embodies war’s fluidity, with pieces that rely on strategic situational placement and embrace complexity without direct confrontation.
Implications of War Machines and State Norms
States typically view their military institutions jealously, appropriating war machines while struggling to exert control over them. This creates a tension in which the warrior must navigate between individual valor and the demands of the State. Historical examples demonstrate this tension, such as the integration of nomads into empires by figures like Attila and Genghis Khan.
Sociopolitical Structures of Nomadic Societies
Pierre Clastres argues that primitive societies intentionally resist the emergence of State structures. Warfare functions to disperse and segment groups, preventing potential states from forming and maintaining the independence of these societies. Rather than creating a state, warfare challenges the hierarchies of centralized governance. In the nomadic context, metallurgists and artisans play essential roles, contributing to metallurgy and crafting tools and weapons vital for warfare. Their metalwork reflects shared cultural expressions and opposes sedentary traditions.
Historical Context and Global Interactions
During the Iron Age, nomads significantly influenced military technologies and cultural exchanges, as innovations in metallurgy impacted tactical warfare across cultures. The integration of these nomadic technological practices into sedentary societies is evident in mutual borrowings and adaptations resulting from various cultural interactions.
Conclusion and Forward-Looking Statements
The uncertainty of modern warfare often mirrors historical dynamics between nomadic entities and the state. The emergence of unnamed enemies continues to reflect ongoing nomadic tensions against state authority. Consequently, political frameworks and forms are evolving from these historical tensions, redefining both war and society in a contemporary context.
Understanding the Body without Organs
The characteristics of a BwO are dynamic; it is not a fixed notion but a continuous practice where individuals navigate the BwO like travelers seeking their place within this evolving landscape. There exists a declared war against the traditional organ system, as perceived by Artaud, with the BwO emerging when the body reaches a saturation point with organs, accompanied by a desire to transcend them. Examples of diverse bodies include hypochondriac, paranoid, schizo, drugged, and masochist bodies, each described with distinct characteristics reflecting their relationship with the BwO.