cheers, Account!!

(1) Footnote for the earlier Guattari works would help.
(2) Be careful not to get pulled into concepts. They need to be explained sometimes.
(3) The sentence: “The abstract machine thus conceptually brings it into the domain of the actual and the virtual along with an emphasis on contingency and historical singularity.”: is a little vague.
(4) “Rhizomatic mappings” as opposed to…what? Maybe launch an attack on psycho-analysis here.
(5) “more freedom” in relation to the molecular is a troubling turn of phrase for my reading of D & G. Is this from the text?
(6) Sentence: “For example, moving from the intensive symbolic to the analogical can be understood if we consider that mystic examples, for example, can be reterritorialized on a fascistic assemblage (fascism being understood as the territorial interpretation of redundancies due to a particular membership to a blood or volk—similar to Badiou’s full void or statist operator of the event which claims that only the people directly involved with an event belong).” A turn to more specificity on fascism (i.e. mysticism in Nazism) would be a nice turn.

Overall, a great paper. You should keep working in this direction and look at a conference paper in the future.