A Deterritorialized History: Investigating German Colonialism ...

However, the simultaneous rejection of singularity and totalization in
deterritorialization leads logically to a charge of relativism on Deleuze and Guattari’s
part. 63 This problem also plagues much literature in world history. The theory can
become excessively holistic and lose touch with empirical reality. Yet, the very nature of
their investigation requires a broad and to some extent relative analysis. Therefore, it is a
relativism subject to the limits and degrees of deterritorialization and this is precisely
what permits its application in a range of contexts in history. 64
Looking at historical change across cultures and through vast sweeps of time
sometimes leads world historians to write mechanistic histories. This is particularly
relevant to colonial histories where historical events can often seem pre-destined by
European impositions, whether economic or social. Deleuze and Guattari avoid the
nomothetic fallacy identified by Immanuel Wallerstein by maintaining that no principles
govern social relations other than the cycle of deterritorialization and
reterritorialization. 65 Nor do they commit an idiographic error by stressing the
determining factor of the uniqueness of specific historical phenomena. 66 Some
determinism is evident in the idea of the eternal repetition of history, but this repetition
includes a transformation, so complete repetition is impossible. Yet the authors’ relativist
stance does not include an attack upon causality in history. Deleuze believes that ideas
do flow naturally from one to another, which demonstrates his belief in causal
relationships. 67 Deterritorialization is therefore a contingent analysis, looking at the most
fundamental of human interactions without positing determinist relations in history.
Deterministic or excessively causal histories are problematic in removing agency
from historical actors. This is particularly significant in colonial studies as Eurocentric
34