A Deterritorialized History: Investigating German Colonialism ...

to the study of history. 43 This is because Deleuze and Guattari’s schema questions
aspects of “traditional” history in a way that challenges historians to formulate new ways
of understanding the past without meta-narratives and definitive interpretations. The
desire of Deleuze and Guattari’s work, as well as this project, is thus not to establish a
radical new history but, as Robert Young states, to construct “a different framework” for
conceiving history. 44
Deleuze states that their work was “philosophy, nothing but philosophy,” and this
has led many scholars to question the instrumentality of Deleuze and Guattari in historical
research. 45 For example, Gayatri Spivak contends that Deleuze is excessively macrological
and incapable of interpreting the influence of colonialism. 46 Additional charges of
essentialism, relativism and absurdity have also been levelled against the two writers by
their critics. 47 But is there truth behind Jay Cantor’s and Manfred Frank’s assertion that
their “delirious” work holds no import for the scholar? 48 Can Deleuze and Guattari’s
engagement with power’s macrostructures adequately relate to actual historical
investigation? In answer, this inquiry follows Noyes, Said and Alfred López who believe
that Deleuze and Guattari’s “mysteriously suggestive” works are more than purely
metaphysical excavations and can provide possibilities for the history of colonialism. 49
How then does the theory of deterritorialization apply to the specific context of
German colonialism? The role of economics, and capitalism in particular, in the colonies
appears to be an area of significant applicability for deterritorialization. Through the
dislocation of traditional boundaries in favour of their redefinition with relation to the
demands of capital accumulation, territory is deterritorialized and stripped of its former
character and reterritorialized according to the requirements of colonial control. 50 The
30