Captain Shell and Péter Magyar — how can you lie this much?!
They claim that fuel is cheaper everywhere else and that taxes on it are lower everywhere else.
Well, in Croatia, Slovakia, Austria, Serbia, and Romania fuel is actually more expensive, and the taxes on it are higher too. And these are just the neighboring countries.
For example, Captain Shell himself should know that in the Shell’s home country, the Netherlands, a liter of fuel costs around 800 forints.
Stop this embarrassing flailing. For once, instead of standing with your friends in Brussels and Ukraine, stand with the Hungarian people and talk to your buddy Zelensky so that the oil pipeline can be reopened.
Frankly, it’s extremely embarrassing that “Captain Shell” cannot speak for even a minute about his own field of expertise without reading from a script. And it’s not about the price of crude oil, nor about production costs.
The other very embarrassing thing is that he is simply telling outright lies. He claims that fuel is much cheaper in every other country and that taxes on it are lower everywhere.
So here are just a few examples, Captain Shell, of countries where fuel is actually more expensive and taxes are higher: Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, and Austria, just to mention the neighboring ones.
And in the Netherlands, Shell’s own home country, people pay around 800 forints per liter for fuel.
Stop this awkward struggle already. For once in your life, stand with the Hungarian people, instead of siding with Brussels and Ukraine.
🎭 1️⃣ Personal Attacks and Discrediting (Ad Hominem)
Key element:
“Shell Captain and Péter Magyar — how can they lie this much?!”
“Shell Captain cannot even speak about his own field of expertise.”
📌 Technique:
The debate is shifted away from the claims themselves and turned into a personal attack against individuals.
🎯 Goal:
To undermine the credibility of the opponent without engaging in a detailed professional or factual debate.
💥 Effect:
The audience no longer examines the real causes of fuel prices; instead, they are left with the impression that
“these people are lying.”
🎯 2️⃣ Repetitive Assertion (Propaganda Mantra)
Key element:
The same statements are repeated multiple times:
- “they are lying”
- “it is more expensive everywhere”
- “there are higher taxes everywhere”
📌 Technique:
Repeating the same claim in different forms.
🎯 Goal:
To increase the perceived truth of the statement simply through repetition.
💥 Effect:
The human brain tends to perceive frequently repeated claims as more truthful.
🌍 3️⃣ Selective Data Use (Cherry Picking)
Key sentence:
“Croatia, Slovakia, Austria, Serbia, Romania… fuel is more expensive there.”
📌 Technique:
Only examples that support the narrative are presented.
🎯 Goal:
To make the audience believe this is a general trend.
💥 Effect:
The full European price structure or tax system is not presented—only a curated list of examples.
⚔️ 4️⃣ External Enemy Narrative
Key sentence:
“You stand on the side of Brussels and Ukraine.”
📌 Technique:
The issue is reframed as part of an international political conflict.
🎯 Goal:
To frame the fuel-price debate not as an economic issue, but as a matter of national loyalty.
💥 Effect:
Anyone who disagrees is implicitly portrayed as “not standing with the Hungarian people.”
🇭🇺 5️⃣ “Us vs. Them” Identity Framing
Key elements:
- “stand on the side of the Hungarians”
- “Brussels and Ukraine”
📌 Technique:
Dividing the world into two opposing camps.
Structure:
- Us: Hungarians
- Them: Brussels / Ukraine / the opposition
🎯 Goal:
To trigger emotional loyalty.
💥 Effect:
The political debate becomes an identity issue rather than a policy discussion.
🔥 6️⃣ Mockery and Emotional Pressure
Key phrases:
- “embarrassing”
- “flailing”
- “Comrade Shell”
📌 Technique:
Use of ridicule and public shaming.
🎯 Goal:
To make the opponent appear ridiculous.
💥 Effect:
The audience perceives an emotional conflict rather than a professional or factual debate.
🎯 7️⃣ False Causal Link
Key sentence:
“Talk to your friend Zelensky and tell him to reopen the oil supply.”
📌 Technique:
The fuel-price issue is attributed to a single political decision.
🎯 Goal:
To assign a simple scapegoat.
💥 Effect:
A complex energy-policy system is reduced to a single political conflict.
🧠 Overall Picture
The text is not an economic argument, but a classic political propaganda structure, built on:
- personal attacks
- repeated assertions
- selective data
- external enemy framing
- national loyalty framing
- mockery and humiliation
- simplified scapegoating
📌 Goal:
To transform the fuel-price discussion into a political identity conflict rather than an economic debate.