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.
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.
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.
Nomadology: The War Machine
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.
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.
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
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.
Abstract Machine of Faciality
The identity of the body is structured by an abstract machine that generates faces and the interconnected systems they create. This machine is not bound by predefined forms; it is unpredictable and appears in various states such as dreams and twilight states. An analogy discussing ping-pong balls animated by a machine illustrates the unpredictability of meaning and interpretation.
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
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:
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.
The War Machine's Position
The war machine exists in the intermediary space between the two poles, facilitating transitions between different forms of sovereignty. Examples include the magic sovereign who possesses binding powers contrasted with the king who utilizes legal frameworks for resolving conflicts. Myths, such as the Horatius Codes and Mucius Scaevola, illustrate this conflict and explore themes of war and the nature of capture.
8. The Plane of Consistency
The plane of consistency is introduced as the abstract machine responsible for generating and maintaining all processes. It is at this plane that forms, substances, and codes intersect, engaging in a continuous cycle of evolution. A distinction is made between abstract machines and concrete assemblages to clarify the mechanics of operations.
8. The Plane of Consistency
The plane of consistency is introduced as the abstract machine responsible for generating and maintaining all processes. It is at this plane that forms, substances, and codes intersect, engaging in a continuous cycle of evolution. A distinction is made between abstract machines and concrete assemblages to clarify the mechanics of operations.
The Role of Desire
Desire's dynamics within society must be scrutinized, recognizing that it produces effects in conjunction with social machinery. While capitalism endeavors to decode desire flows, it concurrently necessitates a regulatory social framework that governs these economic exchanges. The relationship between social production and desiring-production is intricate, demonstrating a complex interdependence that informs how societal desires are addressed and shaped.
The Book as Assemblage
A book does not adhere to a traditional subject-object dichotomy; instead, it consists of various components that interact with different speeds and relations. It reflects lines of articulation, or organization, contrasted with lines of flight, which represent deterritorialization. Literature serves a functional role akin to a machine, connecting with other entities such as war machines and love machines. Writing, therefore, is not merely a process of conveying meaning but rather a way to survey and map connections.
