Andrew Culp thinks D&G would be anti-accelerationists (especially of of capitalism), and against assisting the opposition in any way. Perverts take notice.
Deleuze and Guattari are less used than abused in the early accelerationism proposed in Nick Land’s “Machinic Desire” which fundamentally relies on the opposition between humans and machines—a distinction that is nonsensical within Deleuze and Guattari’s post-naturalist framework (something demonstrated quite cogently in Donna Haraway’s “Cyborg Manifesto”). There is also an odd “boomerang dialectic” interpretation of accelerationism that borrows the affective tonalities of Land’s misanthropy. According to the boomeranger, things have to get worse to get better. Similar to the physics of a pendulum, energy is introduced in one direction to break stasis, with the eventuality of it swinging back in the opposite direction. While Deleuze and Guattari do use a certain energetics, even at their most destructive, their critique of dialectics makes them fundamentally allergic to any strategy based on assisting the opposition. This is why the accelerationist citation of Anti-Oedipus is so perverse.
The devotion to deterritorialization (albeit never actualized in day-to-day behavior) evinces a complicity with the ravenous processes of capitalist wealth accumulation and pubic consumption that are killing the biosphere. Period. Capital is no god – it’s the trick played on us by psychopaths at the helm of toxic institutions. To be an accelerationist today is to be either a sadist or a coward.
“The revolutionary contingent attains its ideal form not in the place of production, but in the street, where for a moment it stops being a cog in the technical machine and itself becomes a motor (machine of attack)…” – Paul Virilio, Speed and Politic