Well, they’re clearly not being paid for their intelligence in Brussels either!
The president of the European Union’s liberal party, Renew, posted about the Peace March and claimed that “hundreds of thousands are marching against Viktor Orbán.”
He couldn’t have been more wrong, since on Sunday we gathered in such large numbers דווקא to stand up for Viktor Orbán and Hungary’s sovereignty.
To make it clear that no matter how much Zelensky and Péter Magyar coordinate, we will not give in to blackmail and we will not be dragged into a war.
And on April 12, we will make it obvious that Fidesz is the only safe choice!
Well, these people aren’t exactly being paid for their intelligence in Brussels either. The Renew — that is, the liberal party’s president and group leader — shared a video from the Peace March from Brussels and commented that hundreds of thousands were marching against Viktor Orbán. Then, of course, after the blunder, the video was deleted.
Now the group leader says that the reality is that this many people are marching in support of Viktor Orbán, standing up against the blackmail that Zelensky and his allies, together with Péter Magyar and his circle, have been carrying out against our country in recent weeks and months.
Glad I could help.
1️⃣ “They are stupid / paid” – discrediting and delegitimization
(ad hominem / delegitimization)
Excerpt:
“Well, they’re not paid for their intelligence from Brussels!”
Technique:
➡️ Attacks the opponent personally, not their arguments
➡️ Implies foreign funding (“paid from Brussels”)
➡️ Mocking, dismissive tone
Goal:
➡️ Immediate discrediting
➡️ Emotional priming of the reader (“don’t take them seriously”)
Effect:
➡️ “If they’re paid → then they’re lying”
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ No evidence for the “payment” claim
➡️ Does not refute the actual argument
2️⃣ Reframing reality (frame battle)
(reframing / narrative control)
Excerpt:
“hundreds of thousands marching against Viktor Orbán” → “actually for him”
Technique:
➡️ Assigns two opposite meanings to the same event
➡️ Replaces data with interpretation
➡️ Own narrative: “Peace March = support”
Goal:
➡️ Control the meaning
➡️ “Rewrite” political reality
Effect:
➡️ “what you see → you misunderstand, we tell you the truth”
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ No objective numbers or sources
➡️ Two competing claims without evidence
3️⃣ Crowd = truth narrative
(bandwagon / mass legitimacy)
Excerpt:
“so many of us gathered to stand up…”
Technique:
➡️ Derives truth from the size of the crowd
➡️ “many people → therefore they are right”
Goal:
➡️ Strengthen legitimacy
➡️ Attract undecided voters
Effect:
➡️ “if so many support it → I should too”
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Crowd ≠ societal majority
➡️ A single event is not representative
👉 What you pointed out (“more people were at the Tisza march”) directly challenges this:
➡️ If the numbers are disputed → the whole narrative becomes uncertain
4️⃣ Building an external enemy
(external enemy / scapegoating)
Excerpt:
“Zelensky and Péter Magyar are working together”
“blackmail”
Technique:
➡️ Links foreign actors with domestic opponents
➡️ Creates a quasi-conspiracy frame
➡️ Uses loaded words: “blackmail,” “war”
Goal:
➡️ Create fear
➡️ Establish a “us vs them” dynamic
Effect:
➡️ “there is danger → we must defend → support the government”
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ No concrete evidence for “collaboration”
➡️ Complex geopolitical issues oversimplified
5️⃣ Black-and-white choice framing
(false dilemma / binary framing)
Excerpt:
“Fidesz is the only safe choice”
Technique:
➡️ Excludes all alternatives
➡️ Creates a simplified decision scenario
Goal:
➡️ Guide undecided voters
➡️ Increase perceived risk
Effect:
➡️ “if you don’t choose them → something bad will happen”
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Multiple political options exist
➡️ Reality is not binary
6️⃣ “Mistake → we were right” narrative
(spin / narrative recovery)
Excerpt:
“they deleted the video → so they were wrong”
Technique:
➡️ Reinterprets an event (video deletion)
➡️ Uses it to reinforce own narrative
Goal:
➡️ Indirectly “prove” their own truth
Effect:
➡️ “even they admitted it” feeling
⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Reason for deletion is unknown
➡️ Does not prove the claim
⚖️ Overall picture (your key point)
The entire text is a classic narrative battle:
Two versions of the same event:
- one side: “people protested against Orbán”
- other side: “people marched in support of Orbán”
👉 Key point:
➡️ No objective, verified numbers are presented
➡️ Both sides provide interpretation, not evidence
🧠 Core conclusion
The text is not trying to inform, but to:
➡️ frame reality
➡️ trigger emotions
➡️ influence political decisions
Main tools used:
- enemy construction
- crowd-based legitimacy
- oversimplification
- discrediting opponents