Gaza Border Towns Remain Loyal to Netanyahu Despite War Trauma
Translated & summarized from Ynet by baba
Residents of Israeli border towns like Sderot, Kiryat Shmona, and Shlomi have largely maintained their support for the Likud party in recent elections, despite the trauma and destruction caused by the October 7th attacks and the ongoing war. While some local leaders attribute this loyalty to government support and a focus on security, analysts suggest deep-seated fear and collective trauma are the primary drivers. This continued political allegiance persists even as these communities grapple with physical devastation and displacement.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Sderot residents continue to vote Likud despite October 7th massacre and ongoing war.
- Kiryat Shmona and Shlomi also show strong, and in Shlomi's case, increased, support for Likud.
- Local leaders offer contrasting views on the reasons for continued voter loyalty.
- Sociological analysis points to fear and collective trauma as key drivers of voter behavior.
- Security concerns are seen as overriding other political considerations for these voters.
Despite the October 7th massacre and ongoing war, residents of Sderot have continued to vote for the Likud party, with preliminary results showing the party securing approximately 39.1% of the votes. While this represents a slight decrease from previous elections, it still places Likud significantly ahead of other parties. The city's population has grown to around 40,000 since October 7th, with new residents and neighborhoods established, yet this demographic shift has not altered the traditional voting patterns.
Even after experiencing the destruction of their police station and the failure of security systems meant to protect them, Sderot voters have shown continued loyalty to the ruling party. This phenomenon extends to other communities in northern Israel affected by the conflict. In Kiryat Shmona, where around 14,000 of the 26,000 residents remain, the Likud party maintained its position as the largest party with 48% of the votes, a minimal drop from the previous election. Similarly, in Shlomi, support for the Likud even increased from 43.5% to 46%.
Local leaders in these areas offer differing perspectives. Gabi Naaman, Head of the Shlomi Local Council, attributes the continued support to the government's perceived assistance and claims residents "lack nothing," citing generous budgets for education, culture, and business. He dismisses criticism of the government's handling of the lead-up to the war, blaming external enemies like Hezbollah. In contrast, Shimon Amar, owner of the well-known "Falafel Amar" in Kiryat Shmona, expressed surprise at the results, having expected a significant shift in voting patterns due to the destruction and displacement.
Sociological analysis suggests that the deep-seated collective trauma and post-traumatic reality in these border towns drive voters towards parties perceived as ensuring security. Professor Nissim Leon of Bar-Ilan University explains that fear of external threats, particularly from Arab populations, overrides other considerations for these voters, making security the primary concern. This emotional response, he argues, is so powerful that it renders traditional election campaigns almost unnecessary, with fear itself motivating voters to support the party they believe will protect them.
Mentioned
