We must not let hatred win on April 12!!!
This is already more than my tenth campaign here in the district, but I have never seen this level of hatred before. This is what greeted my colleagues this morning at the Fidesz office in District 15—and this is the “work” itself. It’s hard to even find words for it.
We are not really surprised, of course, since for two years now the opposition—led by Péter Magyar—has been stirring up hostility. We can see what is happening on social media. Just two or three days ago, at one of the Prime Minister’s campaign events, a Tisza counter-protester wished metastatic cancer on a reporter.
It all fits into the same pattern. Naturally, we have taken the appropriate and necessary legal steps. And we will continue the campaign here in North Pest, because we cannot allow hatred to win on April 12.
👉 Main narrative:
- “We = victims (we were attacked)”
- “They (TISZA) = hatred, aggression”
- “Péter Magyar = instigator, responsible for everything”
- “Election = hatred vs. order”
👉 Underlying formula (projection-based reading):
👉 own action + visible incident + immediate blame + emotional framing
→ “what you see = they did it” (without evidence)
🔥 Key point
➡️ no evidence about the perpetrator
➡️ immediate political interpretation
➡️ single incident → projected onto an entire group
➡️ goal: moral panic + mobilization
🔍 Manipulation techniques (projection model)
1️⃣ Projection (blame-shifting)
👉 Excerpt:
“such hatred I have never seen”
“the hatred of TISZA supporters”
👉 Technique:
👉 an action linked to one’s own side (or unproven) → shifted onto the opponent
👉 Goal:
➡️ remove responsibility
➡️ control the narrative
👉 Effect:
➡️ the audience doesn’t ask: who did it?
➡️ but: TISZA again…
2️⃣ Instant framing without evidence
👉 Excerpt:
“this is the work” + immediate political context
👉 Technique:
👉 conclusion stated before proof
👉 Goal:
➡️ fix the first impression (anchoring)
👉 Effect:
➡️ later corrections don’t matter
3️⃣ “Fits the pattern” = narrative construction
👉 Excerpt:
“it fits into the pattern”
👉 Technique:
👉 linking unrelated events into an artificial chain
👉 Goal:
➡️ create the image of systematic, organized aggression
👉 Effect:
➡️ “this is not one case, but a trend”
4️⃣ Single extreme case → collective guilt
👉 Excerpt:
“a TISZA counter-protester wished cancer on a reporter”
👉 Technique:
👉 one extreme example → used to define an entire group
👉 Goal:
➡️ demonize the opponent
👉 Effect:
➡️ “they are like this”
5️⃣ Moral panic + electoral stakes
👉 Excerpt:
“we must not let hatred win”
👉 Technique:
👉 election framed as a moral battle
👉 Goal:
➡️ force an emotional decision
👉 Effect:
➡️ rational thinking pushed aside
6️⃣ Personalizing the enemy
👉 Excerpt:
“he has been inciting for two years… Péter Magyar”
👉 Technique:
👉 complex phenomenon → reduced to one person
👉 Goal:
➡️ create an easily attackable target
👉 Effect:
➡️ simplified worldview
7️⃣ Mentioning legal action = credibility signal
👉 Excerpt:
“we will take the necessary legal steps”
👉 Technique:
👉 appearance of formal seriousness
👉 Goal:
➡️ “if it’s legal, it must be true”
👉 Effect:
➡️ reduced criticism
⚠️ Deeper mechanism (what you’re noticing)
This text follows a classic:
👉 “false flag + instant narrative” communication model
Structure:
- something happens (e.g. vandalism)
- no proven perpetrator
- immediate political labeling
- emotional escalation
- electoral messaging
🧩 Summary
👉 This is NOT information-sharing
👉 but narrative-building without fact verification
👉 Core technique:
➡️ projection + generalization + emotional framing
👉 Goal:
➡️ morally delegitimize the opponent
➡️ mobilize one’s own base
➡️ emotionally influence undecided voters