国家装置与战争机器（State Apparatus and War Machines） 德勒兹于 1979–1980 年在巴黎 Vincennes/Paris 8 开设的研讨班，共 13 讲。 格式：每段 ZH（中译，默认色）/ FR（法文原文，灰色）/ EN（英译，蓝色）。 本页：Lecture 07，共 177 段。 来源：Purdue「The Deleuze Seminars」Wayback 存档；英译参照 Purdue content-en。

Deleuze continue de bénéficier de la collaboration d’Eric Alliez qui contribue au cours (avec des propos malheureusement en partie inaudibles) sur le mercantilisme et l’essor des banques. Deleuze remonte ensuite le temps pour discuter des formes archaïques d'échange monétaire et de surcodage, en considérant en détail comment l'activité même de surcodage des États et des Empires donne ironiquement lieu à des décodages de flux et de fuites de lignes.

Eric Alliez: Yes, yes, French. [Inaudible words] And, next, therefore, to this venous circuit is located an arterial circuit that he defines as the redistribution to individuals, and it is therefore the State which will give the impetus for exchanges of manufacturing and [inaudible words]. So we find in a … in a French mercantilist named Vauban, let’s say, a conception which is very, very close to that, insofar as he clearly says that the circuit of money begins at the time of government spending. And he explains it as follows: the horizontal circuit induced by State spending is the same as that which, naturally, links Paris to the heartland (campagnes) [inaudible words], simply money circulates there faster, and it is precisely this increase in the speed of circulation, and therefore of money, which will increase national wealth.

7ème séance, 29 janvier 1980

Deleuze accepts Eric Alliez's contribution in the session's first part (approximately thirty minutes, occasionally inaudible) regarding mercantilism, the rise of banks, and tax-trade organization in Europe. Calling mercantilism a political geometry of power creating a new space of appropriation and distribution, Alliez connects this to a new assemblage, the nation, i.e., the gigantic informational machine put in place by the territorial State. Providing examples of revision of fiscal policies from England and France in the 17th century, he confirms Deleuze's previous analysis with additional support from different sources. Then reviewing the formation of the State as an apparatus of capture, Deleuze considers the tendency toward decoded flows escaping the apparatus of capture, a tendency linked to the three forms of overcoding, public property, public works and taxes. Referring to Ferenc Tökei, Deleuze again proposes the figure of the freed slave as the locus for the emergence of private property, both in terms of private labor and in terms of circulation of currency and creation of money (cf. A Thousand Plateaus, plateau 13, notably, pp. 448-452). With the three forms, he emphasizes the dual process of the circuit of overcoding under the State apparatus and the creation of a flow of decoded flows under the private system (that he calls their “intrinsic complementarity”), adding that “extrinsic complementarity” corresponds to archeologist Gordon Childe's hypothesis regarding the invention of the East and its archaic Empire and their relationship to the West, particularly questions of stockpiling, metallurgy, and trade. While outlining feudalism in this dual perspective, Deleuze closes the session by reviewing these two great figures of State, within which kinds of “knots” arise, e.g., the chivalrous form of love (courtly love) and the marital circuit, overcoding as well as decoded flows, suggesting that these perspectives prepare the emergence of capitalism with ...

Deleuze : … comme ça… on… D'abord… euh… D'abord… euh… Éric, tu… tu parles un peu ou pas?

Deleuze: … like that … we … First … First … Eric, do you … would you talk a little, or not?

Éric Alliez: oui

Eric Alliez: Yes.

Deleuze : Voilà, d'abord je cherche ou bien des confirmations ou bien — que vous compreniez bien de quoi on parle — ou bien des confirmations ou bien des infirmations sur le thème qu'on a vu les fois précédentes, à savoir : un certain rapport impôt-commerce, tel que, d'une certaine manière, le commerce ne pourrait se déployer que dans un milieu social d'imposition. Ça, on l'a vu beaucoup. Et alors, parmi nous, là… il y a… il y a… Éric Alliez qui travaille depuis un certain temps sur une à la fois une doctrine économique et une période où cette doctrine a eu beaucoup d'importance, à savoir le mercantilisme.[1] Et alors je lui demandais… euh… comment, à son avis, s'organisait chez ces auteurs dits mercantilistes — qui sont à la fois des praticiens…, qui ne sont pas seulement des théoriciens, [1 :00] qui sont des praticiens — comment s'organisait le rapport impôt-commerce, puisqu'ils ont été à un moment essentiel de la formation historique du commerce européen ? Alors qu'est-ce que tu dirais là-dessus? Qu'est-ce que…?

Deleuze: There you go, first I am looking either for confirmations or else – so that you understand what we are talking about — confirmations or else complications on the theme that we have considered in the previous meetings, namely: a certain tax-trade relationship, such that, in a certain way, trade could only be developed in a social milieu of taxation. We considered that a lot. And so, among us, we have here, we have here … Eric Alliez who has been working for some time on both an economic doctrine and on a period in which this doctrine was very important, namely mercantilism.[1] And so I asked him … how, in his opinion, was organized, among these so-called mercantilist authors — who are both practitioners …, who are not only theorists, who are practitioners — how was the tax-trade relationship organized, since this occurred at an essential moment in the historical formation of European trade? So, what would you say about this topic? What…?

Éric Alliez: [Propos inaudibles]

Eric Alliez: [Inaudible comments]

Deleuze : Tu parles le plus fort que tu peux, hein, parce que… euh, je ne sais pas si….

Deleuze: You have to speak as loud as you can, eh, because … I don’t know if …

Éric Alliez: Je dis, il y a un rapport qu'on dégage entre monnaie et impôt [Propos inaudibles] dans la mesure où le mercantilisme est la doctrine triomphante entre, disons, le milieu du XVIIe siècle et le milieu du XVIIIe siècle, [propos inaudibles]. Alors, en fait, la thèse que je voudrais essayer de dégager, c'est que, en fait, la [2 :00] meilleure formulation, disons, du problème monnaie-impôt qu'ont pu donner les mercantilistes paradoxalement se retrouve chez Hobbes. Alors, en effet, dans le Léviathan, Hobbes dégage, disons, deux circuits de la monnaie, un circuit veineux et un circuit artériel. Alors, j'ai à peu près donné la problématique. Alors, en fait, Hobbes dit que le circuit veineux de la monnaie, c'est les impôts et les taxes qui prélèvent sur les marchandises transportées, achetées ou vendues, une certaine masse métallique. Celle-ci est conduite [Propos inaudibles] c'est-à-dire dans les coffres de l'Etat, et c'est là que le métal va recevoir le principe vital, parce qu'en effet, seule son autorité, c'est-à-dire l'autorité de l'Etat, va pouvoir lui donner son cours.

Eric Alliez: I was saying, there is a relationship that emerges between money and taxes [Inaudible words] insofar as mercantilism is the triumphant doctrine between, say, the middle of the 17th century and the middle of the 18th century, [inaudible words]. So, in fact, the thesis that I would like to try to extract is that, in fact, the best formulation, let's say, of the money-tax problem that the mercantilists could paradoxically have given is found in Hobbes. So, in fact, in the Leviathan, Hobbes identifies, let's say, two circuits of money, a venous circuit and an arterial circuit. So, I roughly have laid out the problematic. So, in fact, Hobbes says that the venous circuit of money is the taxes and levies which are placed on goods that are transported, bought or sold, a certain metallic mass. This one is channeled [inaudible words] that is, in the State coffers, and it is there that the metal will receive the vital principle, because in fact, only its authority, that is, the State authority, will be able to give it its rate (son cours).

Deleuze : C'est très intéressant, ça. C'est dans le Léviathan, ça? Tiens, tiens.

Deleuze: This is very interesting. Is that in Leviathan? How about that.

Éric Alliez : Oui. Pour ceux que ça intéresse, c'est pages 268-269 de l'édition euh… [3 :00]