We have extended the national petition until April 8, because we want to send a clear and firm “no” to Brussels and Kyiv.
Zelensky’s unprecedented blackmail and oil blockade are a threat directed against the whole of Hungary, and we must now stand up against it together and decisively.
If you also do not want your money to be sent to Ukraine or to pay four times more for electricity and gas, then fill out the petition and let us send a joint message: WE WILL NOT PAY!
We want as many people as possible to be able to express their opinion on this very important issue. We also believe that the events of recent weeks and months only reinforce how important it is for Hungarians to stand up for their views. It is important to say that we do not want to send our money to Ukraine, we do not want to finance this war, we do not want weapons to be bought from this money to prolong what is already a very dangerous conflict.
We also do not want Hungarian households’ utility costs to skyrocket because of the war. The developments of recent weeks and months—such as the very serious and explicit threats coming from Ukraine—make this even more relevant. For example, President Zelensky has threatened the Hungarian Prime Minister, and many others have done so as well.
If we also consider what has happened to energy prices due to the outbreak of the latest conflict in the Middle East, it is clear that these issues are more relevant than ever.
Therefore, I encourage everyone to take action: the national consultation can now be completed not only on paper but also online. And anyone who wants to say no to the kind of pressure Hungary has faced in recent months should do so by April 8.
🔍 Main Narrative
👉 “Brussels and Kyiv are threatening Hungary”
👉 “Zelensky is blackmailing us, Ukraine poses a danger”
👉 “Hungarians would pay the price of the war”
👉 “Filling out the petition = self-defense”
👉 “Whoever stands with us protects Hungarian money, peace, and utility costs”
Formula:
fear + external enemy + financial threat + war anxiety + collective resistance + call to action
🧠 Influence Techniques
1️⃣ Construction of an external enemy
Excerpt:
“We want to send a firm ‘no’ to Brussels and Kyiv”
“Zelensky’s unprecedented blackmail”
“his oil blockade is a threat against all of Hungary”
Technique:
simultaneously naming two external actors as enemies: Brussels and Kyiv
Goal:
to create a clear conflict line:
we = Hungarians
they = external pressure actors
Effect:
the audience more easily identifies with the role of a “threatened nation”
2️⃣ Fear-mongering through economic collapse
Excerpt:
“pay four times more for electricity and gas”
Technique:
presenting dramatic, shocking financial consequences
Goal:
to turn a political issue into an immediate personal, existential concern
Effect:
the audience doesn’t hear a geopolitical debate, but feels:
“this is about my own wallet”
This is one of the strongest elements, as it connects war directly to utility costs, turning a distant conflict into a daily survival issue.
3️⃣ Elevating the petition to a moral duty
Excerpt:
“we must act together firmly now”
“fill out the petition”
“let’s send a joint message: we will NOT pay”
Technique:
framing the petition not as an opinion, but as collective national resistance
Goal:
to portray non-participation as passivity or weakness
Effect:
the follower may feel that participation is a minimum patriotic duty
4️⃣ Framing it as “the voice of the people”
Excerpt:
“as many people as possible should express their opinion on this important issue”
Technique:
using the language of democratic participation while already defining the “correct” answer
Goal:
to present the campaign message as the will of the people
Effect:
the audience may feel this is not propaganda, but genuine “public opinion”
In reality, this is highly guided participation: the question appears open, but the text pushes a single desired conclusion.
5️⃣ Creating a sense of complicity in war
Excerpt:
“we don’t want to send our money to Ukraine”
“we don’t want to finance this war”
“we don’t want weapons to be bought from this money”
Technique:
financial support = funding war = buying weapons
Goal:
to morally burden any support provided to Ukraine
Effect:
the audience may feel that disagreement equals indirectly supporting the continuation of the war
This is a simplification, but politically very effective.
6️⃣ Intensifying threat with vague but strong claims
Excerpt:
“very, very serious threats”
“President Zelensky also threatened the Hungarian Prime Minister”
“and many others since then”
Technique:
repetition of heavy, emotionally loaded claims without concrete evidence
Goal:
to maintain a constant sense of siege
Effect:
the audience may perceive Hungary as being under targeted attack
This is a classic danger narrative: the less verifiable, the more it operates on an emotional level.
7️⃣ Linking global events to the campaign narrative
Excerpt:
“what happened to energy prices due to the new war in the Middle East”
Technique:
bringing in another geopolitical crisis to reinforce the message
Goal:
to create the impression that all global events confirm their position
Effect:
the audience may feel:
“see, everything fits together, they’re right”
This works because global uncertainty is immediately turned into domestic political mobilization.
8️⃣ Repetition and emotional keyword anchoring
Recurring words and motifs:
- blackmail
- threat
- war
- our money
- utility costs
- we don’t want
- we will NOT pay
Technique:
repetition of the same trigger words
Goal:
to build emotional automatism
Effect:
concepts merge in the audience’s mind:
Ukraine = blackmail
Brussels = pressure
war = utility crisis
petition = defense
🧱 Structure of the text
The text is very consciously structured:
- mobilizing opening
“we have extended the petition” - identification of enemies
“Brussels” and “Kyiv” - dramatization of threat
“blackmail”, “oil blockade”, “threat” - personal financial impact
“four times higher electricity and gas” - moral positioning
“we don’t want to finance the war” - renewed fear wave
“serious threats”, “Zelensky” - reinforcement of relevance
“Middle East war”, “energy prices” - concrete action
“it can now be filled out online”
This is a textbook campaign structure: emotion → enemy → loss → community → action
🎯 What is the real goal?
Not simply informing.
The real goals are:
- turning foreign policy conflict into a domestic loyalty test
- using the petition as a mobilization tool
- reframing Ukraine into a cost-of-living issue
- emotionally consolidating followers into a single camp
- reinforcing the idea that only they can protect Hungarians
⚠️ What is the strongest propaganda element?
The strongest element is that it links completely different things into a single chain:
Ukraine → war → weapons → our money → utility costs → threat → Zelensky → energy prices → petition
This is effective because the audience does not stop to verify each claim. The goal is not to prove, but to build an emotional logic.
Summary
This is a highly condensed, aggressive mobilization text that:
- defines external enemies
- creates fear
- projects financial loss
- turns agreement into a moral obligation
- frames the petition as national self-defense
- pushes the audience toward immediate identification and action rather than reflection
In one sentence:
This is not simple campaigning—it’s an attempt to extract political loyalty and participation by building on fear, utility-cost anxiety, and a shared enemy narrative.