🤣 Mr. Radnai, the chief bootlicker, has blundered into a topic that is clearly completely foreign to him. According to the puckered-lips guy, utility cost reduction is actually not what it seems to be at all — and it’s not even true that we pay less than we would if we had to pay world-market prices for gas and electricity. In his view, utility cost reduction is not a “black-and-white fairy tale,” and Magyar Péter’s chief bag carrier even writes that “the question is not whether utility cost reduction is needed. The question is why we don’t see the real numbers, and whose business this actually is.”
Then comes the uncomfortable reality, when he asks his followers how much their utility bills have increased in recent years — and almost without exception they write: not at all. So reality paid a visit to Mr. Radnai’s page. You know, that certain forest.
Dear Mr. Márk, esteemed chief puckered-lips bag carrier! Utility cost reduction is in fact exactly what we see. The amount payable — and the very fact that, even according to your own people, utility bills have not increased in recent years — that is reality. This really is black and white, and it’s not even a fairy tale, but the lived reality of Hungarian people. Even if your supporters end up apologizing to you for it.
1️⃣ Personal attacks as an entry point (ad hominem + mockery)
“Mr. Radnai the chief bootlicker,” “the puckered-lips guy,” “the bag carrier”
👉 Function:
- Delegitimization from the very first sentence
- The argument is not attacked; the speaker’s status is
- It pre-labels the target as “not an expert, not competent”
🎯 Propaganda technique:
- Character assassination
- The audience is emotionally primed against the “opponent” even before any debate begins
2️⃣ The narrative of exposing false expertise
“clearly stepping into a topic completely foreign to him”
👉 What’s happening?
- No evidence is given for why the topic is supposedly foreign
- The statement is presented as an axiom
🎯 Technique:
- Authoritative assertion: no debate, only qualification
- The criticism is based not on numbers, but on denying competence
3️⃣ “Real numbers” as a floated but undefined argument
Quoted claim:
“the question is not whether utility cost reduction is needed, but why we don’t see the real numbers”
👉 What’s the problem?
- It never specifies what the “real numbers” are
- No sources are cited
- No alternative measurement method is defined
🎯 Classic propaganda tool:
- Conceptual vagueness
- The appearance of criticism without specifics
→ “Doubt something, but don’t know exactly what”
4️⃣ Loss of control: the comment section as hostile territory
“he asks his followers… almost without exception: not at all”
👉 This is a key moment.
Here is where:
- the narrative collapses
- the speaker’s own audience fails to confirm the pre-fabricated claim
🎯 Why is this dangerous from a propaganda perspective?
- Propaganda relies on a closed information space
- The comment section appears as empirical reality
- Not statistics, but collective experience
5️⃣ “Reality paid a visit” – a visual metaphor
“That certain forest, you know.”
👉 Function:
- A classic “can’t see the forest for the trees” metaphor
- The opponent is framed not as malicious, but as blind
🎯 Rhetorical goal:
- Building moral superiority
- Portraying the opponent as mentally incapable of interpreting reality
6️⃣ Reversing the black-and-white frame
The opponent:
“it’s not a black-and-white fairy tale”
The response:
“Well, this actually is black and white… not a fairy tale, but reality”
👉 What happens here:
- The criticism is turned back on the original claimant
- A simple, tangible metric is used: the amount to be paid
🎯 Key point:
- This is not a macroeconomic debate
- The argument is made at the level of user experience
- “How much is on the bill?”
7️⃣ Closing move: appropriating the legitimacy of the opposing camp
“even according to your own people, it hasn’t increased”
👉 This is the strongest line.
Why?
- It uses the opponent’s internal witnesses
- Not “we say so,” but “your own people say so”
🎯 Anti-propaganda weapon:
- In-group defection
- The narrative cracks from the inside
🧠 Overall picture – what is really happening?
This text is not about utility cost reduction itself, but about:
- Undermining the credibility of “expert” criticism
- Contrasting lived reality with abstract explanations
- Framing the comment section as a form of popular referendum
👉 Core message:
What matters is not what you explain — but what people actually end up paying.