Subject and subjection : Deleuze, Guattari, and the problems of liberalism

This thesis seeks to establish a productive contrast between the political philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari and the Liberal tradition. I conceptualise the latter as a historical development uniting theoretical and political practices justified by models of subjectivity or of harmonious intersubjective association, from which they draw principles of individual freedom and subjection taken to apply in general. I argue that Deleuze and Guattari’s politics of ‘problematisation’, by contrast, is focused on the singular and the potentials embodied by concrete individuals and collectives, and so cannot be reduced to formal institutional practice. I develop the opposition through a series of problems which highlight these different approaches: freedom, sovereignty, revolution, law, and security. In each case, I argue that Liberal philosophies formulate and solve such problems via general and abstract principles, whilst Deleuze and Guattari insist they be reopened by actual individuals and communities as part of their development of new ways of thinking, acting, and living. Further, I use Deleuze and Guattari’s work to contextualise the Liberal tradition within the history of state and capital, arguing that the ‘universal’ principles of subjectivity or association it produced have been internalised by the populations of capitalist democracies, separating them from their capacity to constitute problems and providing nation states with a pliant citizenry and adaptable labour force. I argue that Deleuze and Guattari’s ‘minor’ socialism enables concrete populations to produce their own conception of what it means to be subject to capital, lending itself to internationalism and continuous experimentation with new values and orientations. The original contribution of this thesis lies in its presentation of a Deleuze-Guattarian perspective on Liberalism, which complements existing studies of their conception of the development of the state and capitalism, as well as in its development of ‘problematisation’ as a politics and ethics of the singular