Author: sneff

orban propaganda

Orbán, the government, and their mouthpieces, like Balázs Németh. It is frightening how ignorant the Tisza supporters are and how little they understand European processes. Take Zoltán Horváth, for example. He sent a message in a video. They accuse us of scaremongering with war, of stirring up fear of war.

We are not the ones scaring people, dear Zoltán. Merz, Macron, Rutte, the NATO Secretary General—they are all talking about it. Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber, the boss of Péter Magyar—they are all talking about Europe having to go to war. So who is constantly talking about war?

And it also needs to be examined, dear Zoltán Horváth, how much money Europe is spending on armament. They are the ones who want war. And who is it that wants to live in peace?

The stake of the April election is war or peace. Fidesz stands on the side of peace; Viktor Orbán has already proven himself. Péter Magyar, on the other hand, is Brussels’ man, and he would not be able to prevent Hungary from being dragged into the war. That is why one must not vote for Tisza.

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The purpose of this text is not to analyze the war situation, but to:

  • generate existential fear (“war or peace”),
  • demonize the opponent (Magyar Péter portrayed as someone who would drag the country into war),
  • justify leadership exclusivity (“only Orbán can protect us”),
  • apply psychological pressure on voters.

👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end; it is pre-determined:
Fidesz = peace / Tisza = war.

1️⃣ Authority Stacking

“Merz, Macron, Rutte, the NATO Secretary General… Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber…”

🔹 Technique: stacking authorities
🔹 How it works:

  • different countries,
  • different positions,
  • different contexts
    → blurred into a single, homogeneous “pro-war bloc.”

🔹 The trick:

  • no precise quotations,
  • no context,
  • no distinction between political, military, deterrence, or defensive rhetoric.

👉 The goal is not understanding, but psychological pressure:
“everyone says this → therefore it must be true.”

2️⃣ Projection – “We are not fear-mongering”

“We are not fear-mongering, dear Zoltán…”

🔹 Technique: projection
🔹 Essence:

  • denies the very act of fear-mongering,
  • then intensifies it in the same sentence.

👉 A classic propaganda paradox:
“this is not fear-mongering, we’re just talking about death.”

3️⃣ Total False Dilemma

“The stake of the April election is war or peace.”

🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 What is deliberately left out:

  • the legal constraints of NATO membership,
  • the real decision-making mechanisms of the EU,
  • Hungary’s actual room for maneuver.

👉 A complex reality → reduced to a two-button panic panel.

4️⃣ Enemy Construction Tied to a Person

“Magyar Péter is Brussels’ man…”

🔹 Technique: scapegoating + foreign-agent narrative
🔹 Effect:

  • not a political debate,
  • but a loyalty test.

👉 The question is not:
“is it true?”
but:
“which side are you on?”

5️⃣ “Orbán has already proven himself” – Legitimacy Without Evidence

🔹 Technique: narrative self-justification
🔹 What is missing:

  • when,
  • how,
  • under what international circumstances,
  • compared to which alternatives.

👉 The word “proven” functions as an emotional stamp, not an argument.

🧠 Meta-Level Recognition

This is not a foreign-policy discussion, but:

  • a campaign-closing psychological framework,
  • fear-based decision coercion,
  • justification of authoritarian leadership demand.

The listener is not expected to think,
but to fear and obey.

🔑 The Core in One Sentence

This text is not about
whether there will be a war,
but about making sure that without fear, no one can vote for anyone other than Orbán Viktor’s party.

orban propaganda .. war war war

Let’s protest against making us pay for the war!
The Ukrainian prime minister is demanding an enormous amount of money, €800 billion, which would mean that every Hungarian family would have to fork out 1.3 million forints. Let’s have no doubts about it: the money paid to Ukraine would be missing from the pockets of Hungarian people.

👉 If Hungary had a government serving Brussels, all of this money would go to the war. But as long as there is a national government, we say no to these demands.
🟠 That is why Fidesz is the safe choice!

Szandra, why did you think it was important that as many people as possible sign the petition so that we are not made to pay for the war? Because this is a real and valid issue that is on the table. We have seen in recent days and weeks that there has been talk of a so-called war loan, which, fortunately, Hungary managed to stay out of.

The €800 billion demanded by the Ukrainian prime minister—and this does not even include military spending—is an enormous amount of money. This would mean 1.3 million forints per Hungarian family. Let there be no doubt: that money would be missing from us, from our own resources. There is no such thing as free money. The money sent to Ukraine would also be taken from us, from our own pockets.

And then we could forget about family support programs, pension increases, and many other things that currently provide us with security and stability. It must also be seen that if Hungary ends up with a government that bows its head the way Brussels demands, then all of this money would go to Ukraine.

So this will also be one of the key issues of the election in April, and that is why it is important for us to raise our voices and say a very firm no to this insane idea.

🎯 Core Function (Real Objective)

The purpose of the text is not to factually present Ukraine-related financial plans, but to:

  • generate existential fear (“every Hungarian family will pay”),
  • construct an external enemy image (Ukraine + Brussels),
  • apply internal political coercion (“if it’s not us, you will lose”),
  • pre-emptively lock in the electoral choice.

👉 The conclusion is not drawn at the end, but is already fixed at the beginning:
Fidesz = protection / Anyone else = financial ruin.

1️⃣ “€800 billion” – numerical shock therapy

🔹 Technique: number shock + proportional distortion
🔹 How it works:

  • A brutally large aggregate figure is dropped (€800 billion),
  • then it is directly but falsely personalized:
    → “every Hungarian family = 1.3 million HUF”.

🔹 The problem:

  • there is no decision,
  • no approved mechanism,
  • no national quota,
  • no legal obligation.

👉 The number functions as a psychological weapon, not an economic fact.

2️⃣ “It would come from us” – false causal chain

🔹 Technique: false causality
🔹 Claim:

“The money that would go to Ukraine would be missing from us.”

🔹 Reality:

  • EU financial mechanisms do not work this way,
  • a public budget ≠ a household wallet,
  • financial support ≠ immediate direct payment.

👉 The listener does not evaluate — they start to fear loss.

3️⃣ “You can forget family benefits” – coercive framing

🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Message:

  • EITHER Ukraine,
  • OR pensions, family support, security.

🔹 Effect:

  • moral blackmail,
  • social anxiety,
  • “whoever chooses differently, loses.”

👉 A classic authoritarian electoral frame.

4️⃣ “A Brussels-serving government” – internal enemy construction

🔹 Technique: internal enemy framing
🔹 How it works:

  • not a policy debate,
  • but a loyalty test.

👉 The choice is no longer political, but a moral oath of allegiance.

5️⃣ Petition – the illusion of participation

🔹 Technique: pseudo-participation
🔹 Real function:

  • emotional commitment,
  • “whoever signs has already decided,”
  • campaign mobilization.

👉 Not decision-making, but psychological fixation.

6️⃣ Summary – what is actually happening?

This text is:

  • not an economic analysis,
  • not a foreign policy debate,
  • not a legal assessment.

It is a campaign-closing propaganda unit, whose core message is:

“If you don’t vote for us, your money will be taken.”

Here, “war” is not an event, but a rhetorical instrument.

orbán propaganda…

So this is what the Tisza people are like. Here’s yet another fine example: their North Pest parliamentary candidate, Anna Müller, a teacher. According to her fellow party members, she applied for a state grant and won it automatically, so she now pulls in an extra 75,000 forints a month from the state. And since teachers’ salaries have increased severalfold in recent years, that comes in handy. She doesn’t pay personal income tax either, because her mother does that for her, which also comes in handy. She pockets the income from the state grant as well. And meanwhile they constantly smear the government, the state, the prime minister, the school system, the education system. It’s all so off-putting and utterly lacking in credibility.

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The purpose of the text is to:

  • provoke moral outrage,
  • morally discredit the opponent,
  • cement the “they are hypocrites” narrative,
  • and ultimately implant the idea:
    👉 “those who criticize the state are actually living off it.”

This is not argumentation, but emotional judgment.

1️⃣ Individual case → collective stigmatization

“Well, that’s what the Tisza people are like.”

🔹 Technique: collective guilt
🔹 Mechanism:

  • one individual (Müller Anna)
  • → an entire political community (the Tisza Party)

👉 Classic propaganda logic:
“it’s not that she’s like this – they are like this.”

2️⃣ Lawful benefit = moral wrongdoing

“She applied for a state grant and received it as a matter of entitlement.”

🔹 Technique: criminalization of legitimate rights
🔹 Trick:

  • no claim of legal wrongdoing
  • no suggestion of abuse
  • yet it is framed as a moral offense

👉 Message:
“If you receive state money, you have no right to criticize the state.”

This is authoritarian thinking, not democratic.

3️⃣ Envy-provoking numbers (“75,000 forints”)

🔹 Technique: numerical emotional trigger
🔹 Mechanism:

  • exaggeration of a small amount
  • monthly framing → sense of “mooching”
  • no context (no explanation of purpose, duration, or conditions)

👉 The number does not inform; it agitates.

4️⃣ Family situation as a moral weapon

“She doesn’t pay personal income tax after her mother.”

🔹 Technique: stigmatization of personal circumstances
🔹 Problem:

  • lawful
  • not a chosen condition
  • yet turned into a moral accusation

👉 This is personal humiliation, not politics.

5️⃣ Criticism framed as ingratitude

“Meanwhile they constantly smear the government and the state.”

🔹 Technique: enforced loyalty
🔹 Claim:

  • anyone who criticizes
  • is “biting the hand that feeds them”

👉 This is feudal logic, not a civic understanding of the state.

6️⃣ Final verdict without evidence

“So unpleasant and untrustworthy.”

🔹 Technique: emotional closure
🔹 Function:

  • no evidence
  • no debate
  • only judgment

👉 The audience is not meant to think, but to feel.

🧠 Summary – What is actually happening?

This statement is:

❌ not about public funds
❌ not about education
❌ not about transparency

It is about asserting that:

“Anyone who is not with us is morally inferior.”

This propaganda does not aim to persuade — it aims to exclude.

Is Europe Making a Fool of Itself Over Greenland? A Symbolic Military Gesture Exposed

🥹 Could it be that, once again, EUROPE is making a FOOL OF ITSELF over the Greenland issue? ❓

One after another, EU member states are announcing that they are sending soldiers to Greenland, reacting to the United States’ intention to acquire the island — which belongs to Denmark — for “security reasons.”

So Europe is rattling its saber. But this saber-rattling is exactly as strong as Western Europe’s current condition 🫣

In total, only a few dozen soldiers have been deployed to Greenland. The Germans sent 15 (according to other reports, only 13), the French 15, and Slovenia, for example, 2 (two people…).

But (allegedly) the Swedes, Norwegians, Finns, the Dutch, and the British will also join.

(The Dutch signed up because they often train in Norway anyway, so they handle the cold well 😳😅)

❗️The Italians are not sending troops. In fact, they are openly laughing at the EU’s show of muscle…

“Having 15 Italians, 15 French, and 15 Germans stationed there sounds like the beginning of a classic joke,” said the Italian defense minister.

😳 Could it be that the Brussels crowd has lost its mind because of all this war talk? ❓
Could it be that it would be better to understand the American position and start negotiating? ❓
Is it really worth responding with yet another set of ridiculous, sulky reactions? ❓

☝️Just asking — as a silly Central European… 🤷‍♂️

alexandra propaganda

❗ We are also the party of pension increases.
We have formed an alliance with pensioners and committed ourselves to preserving the real value of pensions.
What’s more, we reinstated the 13th- and 14th-month pensions, which Brussels and the left-wing economists who write the Tisza party’s program would take away at the very first opportunity.
🧡 Seniors can count on us, which is why, for them too, the safe choice is Fidesz.

orban propaganda

🙄 I see that Telex has already rather deftly jumped on Orbán’s remarks today in Miskolc about young people. So let’s clarify a few things.

The problem with young people is not that they are not Fidesz supporters. Let’s be honest: as a young person—by which I mean the 18–25 age group—people rarely articulate a clear party-political position. This is precisely why the opposition mainstream in Hungary today, which is constantly forced to replace its “messiah,” finds itself in a difficult situation. A significant part of their voter base consists of young people who do not vote for them out of sympathy or a firm political worldview, but because rebellion is fashionable.

Four years ago Márki-Zay was the trendy figure, before that Momentum, now it’s Magyar. But this is not about “party loyalty” or well-defined positions; it’s about trends. And that, in reality, is the problem. This is what the prime minister was trying to draw attention to today.

Young people should not be raised to “become Fidesz supporters,” but to learn how to think in complex ways, to acquire independent thinking, and to be able to interpret connections, geopolitical situations, and realities. They should learn what directions, ideas, and situations exist in the world. And teaching this is, indeed, the responsibility of parents.

It is the parents’ task to teach their children how to live in reality. To help them recognize that everything they see in the virtual world is not reality itself—at best, it is only a fragment of it. It is the parents’ responsibility to teach, for example, that just because young people in Hungary do not yet feel on their own skin that there is a war next door, this does not mean there is no war, nor does it guarantee that they will not feel its effects personally in the near future.

Since the coronavirus pandemic, a significant portion of young people have fled from reality into social media. At the time, that really did seem like a better place: there were no lockdowns, no illness, no death—only what the algorithm served them according to their own tastes. This has gone so far that even today many have not returned to reality from there. And this is a huge problem.

Because social media simplifies reality, artificial intelligence removes the necessity for complex thinking, and it “produces” people who believe that things like European Union leaders doing everything in their power to prevent two warring parties from making peace do not affect them—and cannot affect them. Yet in reality, this affects them now. And not just a little.

So Telex simplifies and distorts. No—Orbán is not asking parents to raise their children to be Fidesz supporters. Orbán is simply suggesting that parents should not entrust their children to social media, but should talk with them, think together with them, and try together to understand the world, so that these young people can grow into adults who are viable in the real world and capable of complex thinking.

I know this is longer than a Telex headline, but let’s not spare ourselves the effort of thinking. And then there will be no problem.

The text is not an explanation, not a pedagogical debate, and not media criticism. It is a finely packaged political legitimation speech that employs several layered propaganda techniques. Let’s examine it layer by layer.

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The purpose of the statement is not to understand the situation of young people, but to:

  • retroactively excuse Orbán Viktor’s remarks,
  • discredit the critical press (Telex),
  • and shift responsibility for political socialization onto parents.

👉 The unspoken final conclusion:

If a young person “thinks the wrong way,” it is not the political system that is at fault, but the parents and social media.

1️⃣ Strawman + False Clarification

“Orbán did not say that young people should be Fidesz supporters…”

🔹 Technique: strawman argument
🔹 How it works:

  • no one literally claimed that Orbán said “be Fidesz supporters,”
  • the criticism was about the government’s normative expectations,
  • the author responds by inventing an easily refutable claim and treating it as the opposing argument.

👉 As a result, the real question disappears:

Who decides what counts as ‘correct’ complex thinking?

2️⃣ Depoliticizing Youth = Infantilization

“Young people don’t vote out of party loyalty, but because rebelling is trendy.”

🔹 Technique: generational devaluation
🔹 Effect:

  • young voters are not autonomous political actors,
  • but fashion-following, drifting, easily manipulable masses.

👉 This is a classic authoritarian narrative:

“They don’t understand the world yet – we understand it for them.”

3️⃣ “Complex Thinking” as an Empty Reference

🔹 The term remains undefined:

  • it never specifies what kind of complexity is acceptable,
  • only what is considered “non-complex” (criticism, the EU, pro-peace dissenting views).

👉 In reality:

“Complex” = whatever aligns with the government narrative.

4️⃣ Parental Responsibility → Offloading Political Responsibility

“This is the parents’ responsibility.”

🔹 Technique: responsibility outsourcing
🔹 Effect:

  • the state and education system disappear from the picture,
  • if there is a “wrong-thinking” young person → there must be a bad parent.

👉 This is moral pressure, not educational advice.

5️⃣ Social Media + AI as Modern Scapegoats

🔹 Technique: technological demonization
🔹 How it works:

  • the online space during Covid is retrospectively labeled guilty,
  • algorithms “dumb people down,”
  • AI “takes away thinking.”

👉 Classic logic:

The problem is not the message, but where you hear it.

6️⃣ Hidden Geopolitical Axiom

“EU leaders are working against peace.”

🔹 Technique: axiom without evidence
🔹 Effect:

  • anyone who rejects it “doesn’t understand reality,”
  • debate is excluded; it becomes a matter of belief.

7️⃣ Telex as a Simplifying Enemy Image

🔹 Technique: media delegitimization
🔹 How it works:

  • “they distort,”
  • “we provide nuance,”
  • while the text itself is far more normative than what it criticizes.

🧠 Conclusion – What Is Actually Happening?

This text is:

  • not about protecting young people,
  • not about liberating thinking,
  • but about softened political disciplining.

👉 Its message, simplified:

Don’t question the state, don’t challenge the media, don’t criticize power – instead, re-educate your child at home.

This is not pedagogy, but delayed propaganda, which speaks the language of “thinking” while defining exactly what counts as an acceptable thought – ultimately within Orbán Viktor’s interpretive framework.

orban propaganda

It’s truly unbelievable that not even a Sunday afternoon can go by without Magyar Péter getting exposed for yet another lie. This time, what happened was that he flooded social media with claims that his candidate in Vác had been attacked by Orbán’s henchmen — violent Fidesz supporters, these disgusting people who believe only in violence and who have now even resorted to physical force against his candidates.

And then this very candidate from Vác was forced to give a police witness statement, where he said that no physical assault had occurred, no one shouted at him, no one harmed him in any way. Quite simply, the entire story was a fabrication and a lie on the part of Magyar Péter.

So now I ask you: what do you think a notorious liar would be like if he were to end up in a head-of-state position? Let me say it again: Magyar Péter is a pathological liar. You can barely believe anything he says anymore — practically not even that the sky is blue or the grass is green. And honestly, this is almost literally what we’re talking about now.

Do you still believe anything at all this man says?

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The statement is not an attempt at fact-finding, but rather:

  • character assassination against Péter Magyar,
  • total delegitimization using absolute framing (“nothing he says can be believed”),
  • moral panic-mongering (“what if he became head of state?”),
  • emotional coercion aimed at forcing audience loyalty.

👉 The conclusion is fixed in advance:
“Péter Magyar lies, therefore he is unfit.”
Every subsequent sentence is merely an after-the-fact justification of this premise.

1️⃣ Declaration of guilt in advance – “caught again”

🔹 Technique: preemptive verdict
🔹 How it works:

  • guilt (“lying”) is declared in the very first sentence,
  • no investigation, no evidentiary sequence,
  • the audience is pushed to judge rather than evaluate.

👉 Classic propaganda principle:
“Judge first, explain later.”

2️⃣ Crude exaggeration of the enemy image

“Orbán’s janissaries,” “disgusting people,” “they only believe in violence”

🔹 Technique: demonization + dehumanization
🔹 Effect:

  • emotional overheating,
  • incitement of anger,
  • the issue becomes impossible to assess rationally because it is framed as a moral war.

👉 What matters is not what happened, but what emotion is triggered.

3️⃣ One detail → total personality judgment

“This whole story was a fabrication”

🔹 Technique: generalization from a single case
🔹 Trick:

  • a specific police statement
  • is turned into a comprehensive judgment of character.

👉 Logical fallacy:
single claim → permanent trait

4️⃣ Branding as a “pathological liar”

“incorrigible liar,” “you can’t believe a word he says anymore…”

🔹 Technique: stigmatizing repetition
🔹 Effect:

  • the person loses even the possibility of future credibility,
  • any later rebuttal is automatically treated as suspicious.

👉 This is communicative execution, not debate.

5️⃣ Future nightmare scenario – “what if he were head of state?”

🔹 Technique: hypothetical catastrophe
🔹 How it works:

  • no constitutional or political reality,
  • only fear projection.

👉 Classic authoritarian framing:
“You don’t want this either, do you?”

6️⃣ Audience involvement – emotional closure

“Do you still believe anything this man says?”

🔹 Technique: loyalty test
🔹 Effect:

  • doubt equals being “naive” or “complicit,”
  • the neutral position disappears.

👉 It does not ask for an opinion; it demands side-taking.

🧠 One-sentence summary

This text does not seek truth, but rather:

a politically manufactured verdict produced through emotional destruction,
where facts serve only as props,
and the goal is total delegitimization.

Szentkirályi is a Hungarian disgrace… a total idiot.

❌ It makes a difference whether someone breaks down your door or knocks and asks if they may come in.
Let’s not confuse illegal migrants with guest workers, who come to Hungary with permits and under strict regulations.
In Western Europe, migrants have poured in and public safety has visibly deteriorated, while here guest workers do not cause such problems.
❗Hungary will remain a migrant-free country! ❗

Dear questioner, you are asking me—or requesting clarification—when we talk about illegal migration, presumably in connection with why there are Indian and Filipino guest workers here. The answer is quite simple: we must not confuse illegal migrants with guest workers who arrive with all the necessary permits. They come here in a very strictly regulated manner.

The difference is exactly the same as between someone breaking down your door and someone knocking and asking whether they may come in. That is the entire difference. The situation is that people who are currently working in Hungary as guest workers can receive a work permit for two—exactly two—years, which can then be extended in certain cases. Moreover, they go through all kinds of legal procedures in order to be able to work here.

By contrast, look at what is happening in Western Europe. There, migrants have poured in without questions being asked and without any prior legal procedures, and then they spread their arms and expect the host country to provide a full support system: healthcare, expenses for their children, and various other social benefits—essentially even cash handouts instead of wages. And one can easily imagine what effect this has on a country’s economy.

This is precisely what we do not want to try. So those who come here because they want to work, and for whom—based on the data—the government sees a need for that type of labor, are allowed in, because it benefits us. But not in unlimited numbers and not without questions, as in Western Europe.

And I would suggest one more thing: look at whether the guest workers who are here cause any problems at all for Hungarian public safety or Hungarian society. And then look at the same question in Western Europe.

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The statement is not meant to inform, but to:

  • stir fear (“someone breaks down your door”),
  • create a false dichotomy (illegal migrant vs. “good” guest worker),
  • demonize Western Europe,
  • justify governmental exceptionalism (“we are doing it right”).

👉 The conclusion is predetermined:
Hungary = order and security / Western Europe = chaos.

1️⃣ Breaking in vs. knocking – emotional manipulation

“It matters whether someone breaks down your door or knocks and asks to come in.”

🔹 Technique: criminalizing metaphor
🔹 How it works:

  • the “illegal migrant” = criminal
  • the “guest worker” = polite guest

🔹 The problem:
This is an emotional image, not a legal or social description. Migration is not a private home, but a matter of state legal processes.

2️⃣ False dichotomy – no third option allowed

🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Claim:

  • EITHER a lawful guest worker
  • OR a violent, welfare-dependent migrant

🔹 What disappears from the picture:

  • refugee law
  • EU legal frameworks
  • integration models
  • the complexity of economic migration

👉 Reality is far more nuanced, but nuance disrupts propaganda.

3️⃣ Western Europe as a scarecrow

“They flooded in without questions or procedures.”

🔹 Technique: threat stacking + generalization
🔹 Effect:

  • an entire continent = one single failure
  • no data, no country, no timeframe

👉 A classic “look how bad it is over there” argument—without evidence.

4️⃣ Public security as a vague concept

“Do they cause any problems?”

🔹 Technique: shifting the burden of proof
🔹 Trick:

  • no statistics
  • no crime data
  • no comparative analysis

👉 The audience is expected to feel that there is a problem—this is not proof.

5️⃣ Economic self-exoneration

🔹 Narrative:

  • “it’s good for us”
  • “the numbers show we need them”

🔹 Unspoken facts:

  • low wages
  • labor shortages in poorly paid sectors
  • systematic import of guest workers from the Global South and East

👉 This is economic migration, just under a different label.

6️⃣ Closing line = loyalty test

“Look at here… look at Western Europe…”

🔹 Technique: moral comparison
🔹 Message:

  • those who question it are “pro-Western”
  • those who accept it are “good Hungarians”

👉 This is not a debate, but an identity test.

🧩 One-sentence summary

This text is not about migration, but about
who is afraid, who is obedient, and who accepts the government’s exclusive claim to truth.

szentkiralyi… we are lost… WAR WAR WAR WAR

Sir Richard Knighton, the British Chief of the Defence Staff, says that the nation’s “sons and daughters” must be ready to fight (…) and that more families will come to understand what sacrifice means.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte says: “A war is coming like the one our grandfathers and great-grandfathers lived through.”
French Chief of the Defence Staff Fabien Mandon says: “We must accept the loss of our children.”
Polish left-wing Prime Minister Donald Tusk says: “This is our war.”

No. No. And no.

We will not give either our lives or our money for Ukraine.

Europe is burning with war fever, dragging along even countries larger than ours. We can stay out of this madness only if we have a strong, anti-war, experienced prime minister and a national government. That is why Fidesz and Viktor Orbán are the safe choice.

And I read with shock the news built around the words of the British Chief of the Defence Staff, the French Chief of the Defence Staff, or the NATO Secretary General — all of them saying that we must accept that this war will have human losses, that wars like this were last seen by our great-grandfathers and great-great-grandfathers, and that everyone must make sacrifices.

So I simply do not understand whether these people truly have no idea what they are playing with, or whether they are this heartless, or this greedy for money — because there are always major economic interests involved in war as well. A lot of money goes into a war like this. And somewhere, someone profits from it.

🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)

The purpose of this statement is not a factual interpretation of the war in Ukraine, but rather:

  • existential fear-mongering (“the loss of our children”),
  • construction of an external enemy image (“Europe is burning with war fever”),
  • moral exclusion (“whoever is not with us is pro-war”),
  • justification of exclusive leadership (“only Orbán can protect us”).

👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end, but decided in the very first paragraph:
Fidesz = life, peace / Others = death, war.

1️⃣ Invoking Authority → Emotional Shock

The list appears “factual,” but in reality it forms an authoritarian chain of argumentation:

  • Sir Richard Knighton
  • Mark Rutte
  • Fabien Mandon
  • Donald Tusk

🔹 Technique: authority stacking
🔹 Trick:
– quotes taken out of context
– no clarity on who they apply to or under which scenario
– “war” is presented as an inevitable natural disaster

👉 Effect: the audience does not deliberate; it panics.

2️⃣ “The Loss of Our Children” – A Moral Nuclear Weapon

“we must accept the loss of our children”

🔹 Technique: moral shock
🔹 Effect:
– rational debate becomes impossible
– anyone who disagrees is labeled “pro-child-death”

👉 This is the most powerful propaganda tool:
it cannot be answered without appearing inhuman.

3️⃣ “This Is Not Our War” – False Dilemma

“We will not give either our lives or our money for Ukraine!”

🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Fabricated choice:

A) total war, child sacrifice
B) Fidesz, Orbán, peace

❌ All intermediate options disappear:

  • diplomacy
  • nuanced alliance obligations
  • European security policy
  • the question of Russian responsibility

👉 Reality is reduced to: Orbán or death.

4️⃣ “Someone Always Profits” – Conspiracy Framing

“there is always someone who profits from war”

🔹 Technique: insinuation without evidence
🔹 Effect:
– all policy arguments appear corrupt by default
– the “pro-war” side is framed as morally depraved

👉 This absolves the speaker’s own side from addressing any substantive questions.

5️⃣ Cult-of-Leader Closure

“That is why Fidesz and Viktor Orbán are the safe choice!”

🔹 Technique: authoritarian closure
🔹 Operation:
– no weighing of options
– no debate
– the decision becomes a moral obligation

Politics here is no longer a choice, but a loyalty oath:

  • Viktor Orbán
  • Fidesz

🧠 Summary – What Is Actually Happening?

This text is:

  • not pro-peace,
  • not war analysis,
  • not geopolitics,

but fear-based loyalty manufacturing.

👉 Its simplified message:

“If you don’t vote for us, your children will die.”

This is not argumentation.
This is psychological coercion.