The relationship between war machines and state apparatuses is characterized by fundamental opposition and tension, as explored in the "Treatise on Nomadology." The war machine is conceptualized as an entity that exists outside the state apparatus, embodying a form of exteriority that challenges the state's interiority and sovereignty. Below is an analysis of this relationship:
1. Exteriority of the War Machine
The war machine is inherently external to the state apparatus. It is not a product of the state nor reducible to its structures. This exteriority is evident in mythology, epic narratives, and games, where the war machine is portrayed as a force of multiplicity, transformation, and becoming, rather than a structured, hierarchical entity like the state. For example:
- Mythological Contrast: In Indo-European mythology, the warrior god Indra opposes the magician-king Varuna and the jurist-priest Mitra, representing a force that disrupts the state's binary distinctions and organized sovereignty.
- Games as Metaphors: Chess, a game of the state, is coded and hierarchical, with pieces representing fixed roles and powers. In contrast, Go, a metaphor for the war machine, operates in an open, fluid space, emphasizing strategy, movement, and decentralization.
2. The State's Relationship with War
The state does not inherently possess a war machine. Instead, it appropriates one in the form of a military institution, which is often problematic for the state itself. The war machine, when appropriated, loses its pure exteriority and becomes disciplined, hierarchical, and subordinated to the state's needs. This appropriation leads to mistrust, as the military institution retains traces of the war machine's original exteriority.
3. The War Machine as a Threat to the State
The war machine challenges the state's sovereignty and stability in several ways:
- Disruption of Hierarchies: The war machine embodies indiscipline, questioning of hierarchy, and volatile honor, which impede the formation of stable state structures.
- Alternative Justice and Relations: It introduces other forms of justice, relations, and becoming (e.g., becoming-animal, becoming-woman), which lie outside the state's binary distributions and laws.
- Primitive Societies: Ethnological studies, such as those by Pierre Clastres, show that war in primitive societies serves as a mechanism to ward off the formation of a state apparatus, maintaining dispersal and segmentarity.
4. Coexistence and Competition
While the war machine is external to the state, it coexists and competes with the state in a perpetual field of interaction. This relationship is not one of independence but of dynamic interplay:
- Nomad Science vs. State Science: The war machine fosters a "nomad science" characterized by innovation, fluidity, and heterogeneity, which contrasts with the state's "royal science," focused on stability, hierarchy, and control. For instance, the hydraulic models of nomad science emphasize turbulence and smooth spaces, while state science imposes order through conduits and embankments.
- Cultural and Social Forms: Bands, tribes, and other decentralized groups represent metamorphoses of the war machine, standing against the centralized structures of the state.
5. Appropriation and Transformation
The state often appropriates elements of the war machine, transforming them to fit its needs. This process involves repression and normalization:
- Military Institutions: The state disciplines the war machine into a structured military organ.
- Scientific Innovations: Nomad science is appropriated and constrained by state science, as seen in the history of geometry, architecture, and engineering.
6. Irreducibility of the War Machine
Despite the state's attempts to appropriate and control the war machine, its irreducibility persists. The war machine continually metamorphoses, affirming its exteriority and challenging the state's dominance. This irreducibility is evident in cultural, artistic, and revolutionary movements that resist state control.
Conclusion
The relationship between war machines and state apparatuses is one of fundamental opposition, coexistence, and appropriation. The war machine represents a form of exteriority that challenges the state's interiority, introducing alternative modes of justice, organization, and becoming.
