u/ReindeerMiserable188

Hi everyone,

Im working on a proposal for an interdisciplinary political theory conference and I will really appreciate some feedback before I submit the abstract to the referees.

The core idea comes from Deleuze and Guattari's distinction between the State Aparatus (Sa) and the War Machine (Wm)

As I understand Deleuze & Guattari theory, the relationship between both goes as the Sa trying to capture the Wm (Which is in some exteriority to the Sa), and when the Sa captures the Wm it integrates its capacities into its own reproduction.

But my question goes into What happens if we reverse the direction of this relationship ?

I'm interested in the contemporary far right as this political formation seem to emerge and operate through dynamics that could potentially be described in terms of a war machine such as a strong affective mobilization, antagonistic discourse, hostility toward institutional mediation, networked forms of organization and political communication.

The deal with my idea for the confernce is that when these formations actually enter government, they don't necessarily seem to simply become absorbed into the institutional logic they previously opposed. In some cases, they appear to use the capacities of the State apparatus to weaken, dismantle, or reconfigure parts of that same apparatus, while preserving and expanding the political dynamics that characterized them before entering government.

So the conceptual proposition I'm thinking about is what I'm tentatively calling "inverse capture":

Instead of the State capturing the war machine, the war machine enters the State apparatus and uses its institutional capacities to undermine or transform the conditions that would normally allow the State to capture and neutralize it.

The idea would be to use the concept of the war machine as an analytical framework and ask whether contemporary far-right formations reveal a theoretical possibility that isn't sufficiently developed in the State/war machine relationship as formulated by D&G.

My main question is whether this makes theoretical sense from a Deleuzian perspective, or whether I'm fundamentally misunderstanding the concepts

I'd especially appreciate criticism or things to improve of this abstract from people familiar with Deleuze & Guattari, SciPol or any comments to be honest.

Thank u all

P.s: Im sorry for my english as I think its kinda rusted.