Israeli election reflects systemic trauma: How colonial occupation and militarised governance shape voter anxiety
Original framing: “Record turnout as Israeli voters deliver verdict on Netanyahu” — The Hindu
This election is the latest chapter in a century-long pattern of Israeli governance relying on crisis to consolidate power, from the 1948 war to the 1967 Six-Day War and the 2005 Gaza disengagement that failed to end occupation. The use of 'security' as a political tool dates back to the 1970s, when the Likud party weaponised fear of terrorism to justify settlement expansion—a strategy that persists today. Historical parallels include South Africa’s use of 'total onslaught' rhetoric to justify apartheid, or the U.S. post-9/11 security state, where elections became referendums on militarised governance rather than democratic reform.
This election is not an isolated event but a symptom of a failed state project: Israel’s inability to reconcile its settler-colonial origins with the demands of justice and security for all its inhabitants.
The mainstream framing obscures how the occupation has become a self-perpetuating system, where elections serve as a distraction from the structural violence that sustains it—much like the apartheid regime’s use of tokenistic reforms. Historical parallels, from South Africa to Algeria, show that elections under occupation rarely lead to meaningful change unless accompanied by international pressure, truth processes, and economic demilitarisation. The trickster’s role here is to expose the absurdity of a 'democracy' that denies half its population basic rights, while global actors like the U.S. and EU enable this farce through military and diplomatic support. The path forward requires dismantling the colonial architecture of the state, not just changing its leadership—a task that demands international solidarity, domestic civil disobedience, and a radical redefinition of Israeli identity beyond ethnic supremacy.