Hungarian people are dying senselessly in the war in Ukraine. After József Sebestyén, another Hungarian—Zsolt Reban from Beregszász—has become a victim of Ukrainian forced conscription.
Despite suffering from a severe, lifelong heart condition that had exempted him from military service, the recruiters were not deterred. He was forcibly taken from the street, and just a few days later he lost his life at a training center, far from the front line.
The memory of my most recent visit to Transcarpathia left a deep mark on me, where I met two families who had themselves suffered loss. One is mourning a father, the other a son—grieving in the present tense, endlessly.
When we suffer a loss, we often ask: why us? We rarely receive an explanation, yet the reasons are still clear. While innocent lives are being destroyed, the continuation of the war is being pushed in Brussels. With even more weapons and hundreds of billions, they would prolong the conflict—leading only to further deaths and tragedies.
This tragedy once again shows that Brussels’ war policy is not an abstract concept, but a very real reality that costs Hungarian lives. József Sebestyén was not the first, and sadly, we can be certain he will not be the last.
It is our responsibility to protect our own from this madness, because the Hungarian government is the only one in Europe that has represented peace from the very beginning.
In Hungary, only Fidesz can and wants to say no to Brussels’ war plans. There is only one safe choice: Fidesz.
1️⃣ Real tragedy → emotional anchor
The text opens with specific names and personal fates:
- Sebestyén József
- Reban Zsolt
This is not accidental.
👉 Function:
- immediate empathy
- grief, injustice, anger
- the reader becomes emotionally involved before thinking
At this point, this is not yet propaganda – this is the gateway through which the audience is let in.
2️⃣ Medical details = moral shock
“a lifelong heart condition,”
“exempted from military service,”
“forcibly abducted”
This is emotional maximization.
👉 Function:
- the Ukrainian state is morally demonized
- no legal or administrative nuance
- no evidentiary chain → there is emotion, but no factual processing
In the reader’s mind:
“This is not war, this is inhumanity.”
3️⃣ Personal experience inserted = illusion of credibility
“My recent visit to Transcarpathia left a deep impression on me…”
This is the classic witness position.
👉 Function:
- “I was there”
- “I saw it”
- therefore evidence is unnecessary, because emotional testimony replaces it
This is not a lie, but it is not verifiable either.
4️⃣ Individual tragedies → designation of a collective cause
This is where the key shift happens:
“the causes are clear”
“in Brussels, they are pushing for the continuation of the war”
⚠️ Logical leap:
- no decision-making mechanism is shown
- no concrete EU resolution is cited
- no causal chain is presented
👉 Yet the following association is created:
death → Brussels → responsibility
This is known as attributional slippage.
5️⃣ “Brussels” as a faceless arch-villain
“in Brussels…”
“with hundreds of billions…”
Here, we see no institutions, no individuals, no legal acts, only a foggy enemy image.
👉 Function:
- directing anger
- assigning an external culprit
- the conflict becomes non-debatable, because there are no specifics
6️⃣ “Not abstract politics, but Hungarian blood” – emotional closure
One of the strongest passages:
“not an abstract concept, but a very real reality demanding Hungarian lives”
👉 This is emotional closure, not argumentation.
The debate ends here, because:
- anyone who challenges it → insensitive
- anyone who questions it → relativizing suffering
This is the moral shutdown technique.
7️⃣ Exclusive savior narrative
“the Hungarian government is the only one in Europe…”
“only Fidesz can and wants to say no”
This is not a political claim, but a creed.
👉 Formula:
- the world = insane
- we = the only rational ones
- choice = moral obligation
This is identity politics, not policy debate.
8️⃣ Campaign closure: no alternative
“There is only one safe choice: Fidesz!”
This is the classic false dilemma:
- either you’re with us → or on the side of death
- no third option
- no nuance
🧠 Big picture – what drives this text?
It does not rely on outright lies, but on:
- selectively chosen tragedies
- emotional over-amplification
- imposed political cause-and-effect
🎯 Goal:
- fear → loyalty
- grief → votes