🚨 “There is no war, there is no war, there is no war” – no matter how much Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz from Tisza keeps repeating this, all we have to do is look around the world to see what a huge lie it is. Brussels leaders are making statement after statement about sending troops to Ukraine and preparing for war by 2030. It sounds insane, but this is reality.
The Tisza politicians are already disregarding Hungarian interests and repeating the same lines as their bosses in Brussels and Kyiv: that weapons and as much money as possible should be sent to Ukraine, and that we should get involved in the war.
👉 All of this is supported by Péter Magyar and his allies while Ukraine is continuously blackmailing us — with threatening remarks and by refusing to reopen the Druzhba oil pipeline. So whose side are they really on?
“There is no war, there is no war, there is no war, there is no war — don’t you get it? Who are you, Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz? This stupid war topic always comes up. There’s no need to fear war. There is no war, there is no war, there is no war.”
Well, in our view, one only needs to look around the world to see the unfortunate fact that there is a war. Ukraine wants more. Some European countries have indicated that, if requested, they are ready to contribute even with troops. And it is also an unfortunate fact that the forces we are fighting against here in Hungary represent the position that Ukraine should be given weapons and money. But first and foremost, there is the €90 billion European Union loan. And they would even involve Hungary in the war.
It is particularly outrageous given that the Ukrainians no longer frame their demands as requests for support or for EU accession, but as outright blackmail — since they are unwilling to reopen the Druzhba oil pipeline. Today they received a firm response from Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. He called on them to change their anti-Hungarian policy. More respect for Hungary!
As long as there is a national government, we will protect Hungary’s energy supply and stay out of the war.
🟠 That is why Fidesz is the safe choice!
🟠 Communication of Szentkirályi Alexandra – Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis
Narrative:
“There is war + Brussels/Kyiv are blackmailing + Tisza betrays + Fidesz protects”
Actors:
Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz
Magyar Péter
Orbán Viktor
Fidesz
Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect
1️⃣ Repetition as a psychological weapon – “There is no war, there is no war…”
📌 Technique:
- Mocking, exaggerated repetition.
- Caricature-like oversimplification of the opponent’s position.
- Rhythmic chanting → emotional trigger.
🎯 Goal:
To ridicule and infantilize the opponent.
💥 Effect:
The audience does not perceive a substantive debate, but rather a “reality-denying” figure.
2️⃣ Dramatization of existential threat – “There is war in the world”
📌 Technique:
- Emphasis on global instability.
- “Just look around the world” → vague but powerful imagery.
- References to Europe preparing for war by 2030.
🎯 Goal:
To elevate a political issue into a matter of existential security.
💥 Effect:
The audience perceives not a policy debate, but a survival situation.
3️⃣ External control narrative – “Bosses in Brussels and Kyiv”
📌 Technique:
- Use of the word “boss” → image of subordination.
- Sovereignty framing.
- Multi-level enemy construction (Brussels + Kyiv).
🎯 Goal:
To turn the election into a question of loyalty:
“ Hungarian interest or foreign interest?”
💥 Effect:
The audience evaluates allegiance rather than policy programs.
4️⃣ Blackmail framing – “Druzhba oil pipeline”
📌 Technique:
- Energy supply framed as a national security issue.
- “Not a request, but blackmail” → moral reframing.
- Dramatization of external pressure.
🎯 Goal:
To place the conflict within a narrative of injustice.
💥 Effect:
Emotional outrage and defensive reflex.
5️⃣ Moral contrast – “We protect vs. they would drag us in”
📌 Technique:
- Binary division.
- “We stay out of the war” as a peace promise.
- “Fidesz is the safe choice” → stability framing.
🎯 Goal:
To position the party as the solution to fear.
💥 Effect:
Fear → desire for security → political support.
🎯 Overall Picture
This communication pattern:
- Builds a sense of threat (war, energy, blackmail)
- Portrays the opponent as serving foreign interests
- Generates moral outrage
- Concludes with a promise of security
A classic fear–protection narrative:
“There is danger → they are part of the danger → we will protect you.”