In Europe, in any political community that has even a shred of self-respect, a politician would be forced to resign for making a Nazi salute. Yet Zsolt Tárkányi, Péter Magyar’s press chief and the Tisza Party’s candidate in Debrecen, has remained in his position even after a photo of him making such a gesture became public.

This is simply unacceptable. Evasion, silence, and lack of consequences—just as we have come to expect on the left.

The blind hatred emanating from Tisza day after day always brings something new. But an even greater problem is that this is not new at all—it is a memento from a dark past, a symbol tied to the brutal extermination of millions. It is a destructive emblem of inhumanity and visceral hatred, forever embedded in the history of humanity.

The prohibition of the Nazi salute and identification with a murderous ideology is a point of consensus across political sides and parties in Europe. In a party where this is tolerated, where it carries no consequences, there are no boundaries. And a political community that does not immediately reject such behavior—where it is not crystal clear that this is unacceptable for anyone—ends up carrying this stigma collectively.

There is no room for evasion here. We cannot look away, and we cannot remain silent. Yet that is exactly what is happening. The liberal media remains silent. There are no tough questions, no petitions. No torchlight marches against an antisemitic politician—because if someone hates Viktor Orbán enough, they are protected, and even a Nazi salute becomes permissible.

Those who remain silent now are effectively saying that this is acceptable. And those who silently overlook it—on what basis will they speak up in the future when someone praises the Nazis or aligns themselves with a murderous ideology?

We do not want our children to grow up in a Hungary where being a Nazi is tolerated if a party’s current interests require silence.

Zsolt Tárkányi must step down, because with that salute he has written himself out of the ranks of respectable people. And so have those who tolerate him.

The spread of hatred stands in opposition to the vision of a calm and stable country.

Viktor Orbán and Fidesz are the reliable choice that Hungary needs now more than ever.

1️⃣ Moral shock and instant condemnation narrative

(moral shock framing / instant condemnation)

Excerpt:
“In Europe… a politician would be dismissed for a Nazi salute”
“This is simply unacceptable”

Technique:
➡️ Frames the issue as an absolute moral question
➡️ Does not examine context → delivers an immediate judgment
➡️ Legitimizes the claim by referring to European norms

Goal:
➡️ Trigger immediate outrage in the reader
➡️ Shut down debate from the very beginning

Effect:
➡️ “This is obviously unacceptable → nothing to discuss”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Context, evidence, and details are missing
➡️ Moral framing → suppresses critical thinking

---

2️⃣ Expansion of collective guilt

(guilt by association / collective blame)

Excerpt:
“as is typical on the left”
“where this is allowed… there are no boundaries”

Technique:
➡️ A specific case → extended to an entire political side
➡️ Generalization (“the left is like this”)

Goal:
➡️ Turn an individual case into a systemic accusation
➡️ Fully delegitimize the opposition

Effect:
➡️ “It’s not one person’s fault → the whole side is like this”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ One case ≠ entire political community
➡️ Generalization without evidence

---

3️⃣ Emotional activation through historical trauma

(historical trauma framing / emotional amplification)

Excerpt:
“a symbol of the brutal destruction of millions”
“a murderous ideology”

Technique:
➡️ Places the Nazi symbol into the strongest possible emotional context
➡️ Creates a moral absolute

Goal:
➡️ Trigger maximum emotional reaction
➡️ Morally destroy the opponent

Effect:
➡️ “This is not political debate → this is good vs. evil”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Emotional weight may suppress factual analysis
➡️ Nuance disappears

---

4️⃣ “If they don’t condemn it → they are all guilty” logic

(false dilemma / moral absolutism)

Excerpt:
“where this is not clearly rejected… everyone bears this mark”

Technique:
➡️ Binary logic: either you condemn it → or you are complicit
➡️ No middle ground

Goal:
➡️ Pressure political actors and media
➡️ Create moral coercion

Effect:
➡️ “If you stay silent → you are also guilty”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Reality is more complex (timing, information, procedures)
➡️ False dilemma

---

5️⃣ Anti-media narrative (accusation of silence)

(media bias framing / silence accusation)

Excerpt:
“the left-liberal media is silent”

Technique:
➡️ Unproven generalization about the media
➡️ “they are covering it up” narrative

Goal:
➡️ Discredit independent sources of verification
➡️ Establish narrative exclusivity

Effect:
➡️ “If I don’t see it in the news → it must be hidden”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ No concrete examples or data
➡️ Homogenization of the entire media landscape

---

6️⃣ Moral panic and fear of the future

(moral panic / fear appeal)

Excerpt:
“a Hungary where being a Nazi is allowed”

Technique:
➡️ Builds a societal future scenario from a single case
➡️ Exaggerated consequences

Goal:
➡️ Generate fear
➡️ Mobilize politically

Effect:
➡️ “This is dangerous for our children → we must act”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ One case ≠ societal trend
➡️ Disproportionate conclusion

---

7️⃣ Enemy vs. order narrative

(order vs chaos framing)

Excerpt:
“spreading hatred ↔ a calm and stable country”

Technique:
➡️ Creates a binary opposition:

• opponent = chaos, hatred
• own side = order, calm

Goal:
➡️ Create a simple decision framework

Effect:
➡️ “Either them → or order”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Oversimplification

---

8️⃣ Direct political conclusion (campaign closing)

(call-to-action / electoral framing)

Excerpt:
“Viktor Orbán and Fidesz are the safe choice”

Technique:
➡️ The entire argument leads to a political decision
➡️ Moral issue → turned into an electoral recommendation

Goal:
➡️ Influence voting behavior

Effect:
➡️ “If you reject this → you must choose them”

⚠️ Real issue:
➡️ Moral issue → converted into political marketing

---

🧠 Overall picture (briefly)

This text is a classic emotional–moral propaganda combination that:

• builds on a highly negative symbol (Nazi salute)
• extends it to an entire political side
• creates moral pressure and fear
• then channels the reader toward a specific political choice

👉 Core pattern:
incident → generalization → emotional amplification → fear → political direction

Zelensky and virtually every Ukrainian politician, military officer, and analyst are saying they are rooting for Tisza.

Ruszin-Szendi shouts “Slava Ukraini.”

Tisza’s MEPs applaud in Brussels wearing T-shirts with Ukrainian flags.

Péter Magyar had his own supporters vote in favor of Ukraine’s EU accession.

István Kapitány, giving in to Ukrainian blackmail, would cut Hungary off from cheap Russian energy.

A Ukrainian flag appeared at Tisza’s pro-war march.

At City Hall in the capital, led by Gergely Karácsony and the Tisza Party, the Ukrainian flag is still hanging even after the death threats made by Ukrainians against the Prime Minister’s family.

Does anyone still have any doubts left?

Brussels and Zelensky have joined forces with Péter Magyar to bring down the national government and install a pro-Ukraine government so that Hungarians, too, would finance the war, finance Ukraine, and give up cheap Russian energy.

That would push fuel prices above 1,000 forints and make us pay 3 to 4 times more for utilities.

Hungarians want no part of this. We showed that at the Peace March as well, and everyone knows: on April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.

1️⃣ “Everyone supports them” narrative

(bandwagon + authority framing)

Excerpt:
“Zelensky and all Ukrainian politicians… support Tisza”

Technique:
➡️ Total generalization (“all”)
➡️ Presents external actors as a unified voice
➡️ Appeal to authority (politicians, military figures)

Goal:
➡️ Frame Tisza as “backed by foreign actors”
➡️ Create suspicion

Effect:
➡️ “They do not represent Hungarian interests”

⚠️ What is omitted / distorted:

• No evidence that “everyone” says this
• Individual statements are generalized
• Analysts’ opinions ≠ official positions

---

2️⃣ Symbolic guilt (flag = loyalty)

(guilt by association)

Examples:

• “Ukrainian flag T-shirts”
• “a Ukrainian flag appeared”
• “the Ukrainian flag is displayed”

Technique:
➡️ A visual symbol = political loyalty
➡️ Context is removed

Goal:
➡️ Trigger emotional reaction
➡️ Suggest “they serve Ukraine”

Effect:
➡️ Automatic association in the reader’s mind

⚠️ What is omitted:

• A flag can represent solidarity (not political subordination)
• No context: who, why, under what circumstances

---

3️⃣ Quote mining + reframing

(quote mining / reframing)

Excerpt:
“Slava Ukraini”
“he had his voters support Ukraine’s EU accession”

Technique:
➡️ Short statements are highlighted
➡️ Given new meaning without context

Goal:
➡️ Strengthen the “betrayal” narrative

Effect:
➡️ Simplified image: “they stand with Ukraine”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• What exactly did the statement mean?
• In what situation was it said?
• Was it a poll or an actual policy decision?

---

4️⃣ Forced causal chain

(false cause / domino effect)

Excerpt:
“pro-Ukraine government → we fund the war → expensive energy → 1000 HUF fuel”

Technique:
➡️ Multi-step chain without evidence
➡️ Assumptions stacked together

Goal:
➡️ Create fear through economic consequences

Effect:
➡️ “if they come → financial disaster”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• No proof these outcomes are inevitable
• Energy prices are driven by global factors
• EU accession ≠ automatic cost increase

---

5️⃣ External conspiracy narrative

(conspiracy framing)

Excerpt:
“Brussels and Zelensky teamed up with Péter Magyar”

Technique:
➡️ Linking multiple actors without evidence
➡️ Suggesting hidden coordination

Goal:
➡️ Fully delegitimize the opponent
➡️ Portray them as “not independent”

Effect:
➡️ Distrust, enemy image

⚠️ What is omitted:

• No concrete evidence
• Diplomatic relations ≠ conspiracy

---

6️⃣ Fear + wallet manipulation

(fear appeal + economic anxiety)

Excerpt:
“fuel would be over 1000 HUF”
“utility costs would be 3–4 times higher”

Technique:
➡️ Specific numbers (illusion of credibility)
➡️ Extreme scenarios

Goal:
➡️ Trigger personal fear

Effect:
➡️ Immediate rejection (“I don’t want this”)

⚠️ What is omitted:

• Not substantiated
• Market prices are not determined by a single political decision

---

7️⃣ “The people have already decided” narrative

(bandwagon + legitimacy)

Excerpt:
“Hungarians don’t want this… we showed it at the Peace March”

Technique:
➡️ One event = opinion of the entire society
➡️ Crowd = truth

Goal:
➡️ Build legitimacy

Effect:
➡️ “if you disagree → you are the minority”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• One event ≠ representative sample
• Election ≠ demonstration

---

🧠 Overall picture (what is actually happening)

The text follows a classic propaganda structure:

👉 pattern:

external enemy + internal traitor + economic fear + moral framing

---

⚠️ The key manipulation

👉 what you correctly noticed:

✔️ Omission of context + reframing

This is how it works:

• select a single element
  (flag, statement, event)
• remove it from its context
• assign a new meaning
  → “this proves that…”
• build a larger narrative on top of it

---

🎯 In short

This text:

• does not prove → it connects
• does not analyze → it suggests
• does not show the full picture → it selects and distorts

Today, the Government of Hungary is the government of the Hungarian people. We are working to ensure that this remains the case after April as well—that it is not Zelensky or Brussels who forms the government, but the Hungarian people.

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

I do not want to tell you that the current government is flawless—I would gladly say so, but we all know that is not the case. Those who work also make mistakes. However, I can say with certainty that Hungary has a government that stands with you, only with you, and wholeheartedly stands for Hungary. We have a government that is capable of protecting Hungary and safeguarding the achievements of recent years.

1️⃣ “Government of the people” narrative

(people’s government framing / populist legitimacy)

Excerpt:
“Today, Hungary’s government is the government of the Hungarian people.”

Technique:
➡️ Directly equates the government with “the people”
➡️ Eliminates the distinction between the state and a political force

Goal:

• strengthen legitimacy
• create the frame: “whoever opposes them → opposes the people”

Effect:
➡️ The reader may feel:
supporting the government = a patriotic duty

👉 Real issue:
a government ≠ the entire society

---

2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt:
“so that neither Zelensky nor Brussels forms the government”

Technique:
➡️ Brings foreign actors (Zelensky, Brussels) into a domestic political decision
➡️ Suggests a false image as if they could “form a government”

Goal:

• generate fear
• strengthen the sovereignty-protection narrative
• dramatize the stakes of the election

Effect:
➡️ “if you don’t vote for them → foreigners will rule”

👉 Real issue:
foreign actors do not form the Hungarian government

---

3️⃣ False dilemma (reducing to two choices)

(false dichotomy)

Excerpt:
“not … but the Hungarian people”
“Fidesz … the safe choice”

Technique:
➡️ Reduces reality to two options:

• Fidesz = Hungarian people
• everything else = foreign interests

Goal:

• eliminate alternatives
• trap undecided voters

Effect:
➡️ The reader may feel:
there is no real choice

---

4️⃣ “Safe choice” framing

(certainty framing / risk aversion manipulation)

Excerpt:
“the safe choice”

Technique:
➡️ Creates a safety vs. risk dichotomy
➡️ Frames change as dangerous

Goal:

• protect the status quo
• appeal to risk-averse voters

Effect:
➡️ “better the known than the unknown” mindset

---

5️⃣ Apparent self-criticism

(strategic concession / inoculation)

Excerpt:
“not perfect… those who work also make mistakes”

Technique:
➡️ Admits minor flaws intentionally
➡️ Increases perceived credibility

Goal:

• soften criticism
• build trust

Effect:
➡️ “sounds honest → makes everything else more believable”

👉 Trick:
no concrete mistakes are actually named

---

6️⃣ Emotional alignment and loyalty

(emotional alignment / loyalty framing)

Excerpt:
“standing with you and only with you”
“with all its heart for Hungary”

Technique:
➡️ Builds emotional rather than rational connection
➡️ Creates a moral bond

Goal:

• foster loyalty
• suppress critical thinking

Effect:
➡️ “they are with us → therefore we must support them”

---

7️⃣ Protection narrative

(protection narrative / fear appeal)

Excerpt:
“able to protect Hungary”
“protect the achievements of recent years”

Technique:
➡️ Combines threat + protection
➡️ Implies danger: someone could take these achievements away

Goal:

• generate fear
• raise the stakes of the election

Effect:
➡️ “if not them → everything is at risk”

---

🧠 Overall picture (briefly)

The text is a classic populist + defensive propaganda mix:

Key elements:

• “we are the people”
• “external enemies are threatening”
• “only we can protect you”
• “there is no real alternative”

Core logic:

👉 Fidesz = security + nation + protection
👉 opposition = foreign influence + risk + uncertainty

---

🎯 Main manipulation

➡️ **The election is framed not as a political choice,
but as an existential act of defense.

Without Budapest, there is no great victory. The nation’s capital showed at the Peace March that the “March youth” can look down on us with pride.

This patriotic spirit suits the city very well, and it would be even better if this mindset dominated affairs in the capital—because in my opinion, things would run better here too. By the way, how do you see it in Budapest—how strong are we, how determined are we?

I think that anyone who is right-wing in Budapest—which is a difficult city for the right—works twice as hard and is twice as determined. And let’s not forget that without the patriotic national forces of Budapest, there would never have been a two-thirds victory in the previous elections.

So now as well, every patriotic right-wing Budapest resident who wants to raise their voice against Ukrainian pressure is greatly needed on April 12—needed more than ever.

🔎 Rhetorical / Propaganda Analysis

1️⃣ Bandwagon Effect / Mass Legitimacy

Excerpt:
“Without Budapest there is no great victory”
“It was demonstrated at the Peace March”

Technique:
➡️ Uses the Peace March as proof that “the nation stands behind them”
➡️ Generalizes broad social support from a single event

Goal:

• Strengthen the legitimacy of their own side
• Create the feeling that “we are the majority”

Effect:
➡️ The audience may feel:
if many people support it → then it must be right

👉 Real issue:

• an event ≠ election result
• participation ≠ representative social support

---

2️⃣ False Cause / Oversimplification

Excerpt:
“Without the patriotic forces of Budapest, there would have been no two-thirds majority”

Technique:
➡️ Reduces a complex election outcome to a single factor

Goal:

• Exaggerate Budapest’s role
• Mobilize their own voter base

Effect:
➡️ The audience may believe:
their own participation was a decisive historical factor

👉 Reality:

• a two-thirds majority = a complex system of national lists + individual districts
• Budapest is traditionally not the strongest base of the right

---

3️⃣ Identity Framing / In-group Pride

Excerpt:
“Anyone who is right-wing in Budapest is twice as determined”

Technique:
➡️ “Elite minority” narrative
➡️ Suggests moral superiority

Goal:

• Strengthen group identity
• Increase loyalty

Effect:
➡️ Supporters feel:
“we are special”

---

4️⃣ Symbolic Nationalism / Emotional Framing

Excerpt:
“The March youth can proudly look down on us”

Technique:
➡️ Connects current politics to historical heroes

Goal:

• Elevate the political side to a moral high ground

Effect:
➡️ Political choice becomes a patriotic duty

---

5️⃣ External Enemy Framing

Excerpt:
“Ukrainian blackmail”

Technique:
➡️ Introduces an external enemy into the narrative

Goal:

• Create fear
• Simplify politics into “us vs them”

Effect:
➡️ If you’re not with them → you’re with external forces

---

📊 6️⃣ THE CORE: Manipulation with “numbers”

Claim:

➡️ “Tisza was beaten in numbers → this is a fact”

What the text actually does:

➡️ DOES NOT provide any real numbers
➡️ Only creates an impression

---

🔧 Techniques:

❌ 1. Implicit suggestion of numbers

• “it showed”
• “great victory”
• “we need everyone”

➡️ replaces data with emotion

---

❌ 2. Event ≠ measurement

• A march is not statistical evidence
• No:
  • sampling
  • ratios
  • comparison

---

❌ 3. Ignoring the opposition

➡️ No mention of:

• other events
• comparative data

---

❌ 4. Declaring something a “fact” without proof

➡️ Classic propaganda:
claim → no evidence → presented as fact

---

🧠 Short summary (raw, as requested)

👉 This is not a data-based claim, but:

• emotional framing
• identity building
• mass illusion

👉 Statements like
“Tisza was beaten in numbers”
are not proven facts → but political narratives

👉 Real measurement would be:

• election results
• opinion polls
• participation comparisons

---

⚡ One sentence version:

This text doesn’t use data—it manufactures a sense of mass support and sells it as a “fact.”

Péter Magyar was exposed at his own march by the Soros-backed, Hungary-hating Brussels MEP. Among several large Ukrainian flags, Daniel Freund openly stated that the leader of the left stands fully behind Zelensky.

“He would allow the financing of Ukraine and its military support, and I think we need to get rid of fossil energy, especially if it is Russian energy.”

So, according to the statements of his own allies, the leader of the left would financially support Ukraine and send weapons into the war, while immediately scrapping the cheap energy that protects Hungarian families.

That is why Brussels sends its people here, and that is why their blue-and-yellow flags are present. Because they know perfectly well that Péter Magyar would not be able to say no to their expectations: he would drag Hungary into the war, send Hungarian taxpayers’ money to Ukraine, and phase out cheap Russian energy.

As long as Hungary has a national government, we will stay out of the war, we will not send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine, and we will not pay more for energy. That is why Fidesz is the safe choice.

Daniel Freund, one of George Soros’s favorite politicians, exposed Péter Magyar and his allies. Speaking as a participant at Péter Magyar’s march, he said that if Péter Magyar were in government, support would go to Ukraine, our money would also start flowing to Ukraine, and Hungary should break away from cheap Russian energy.

No matter how much Péter Magyar and his allies deny it, no matter how much they deny the Ukrainian flags at their march, and no matter how much they claim they would not do this, we know exactly that the Ukrainian flag is already flying at City Hall, and that they sat in the European Parliament wearing Ukrainian shirts. All of this proves that they would be a pro-Ukraine government.

We will not allow this. That is also why so many of us attended the Peace March. There we showed that we cannot be blackmailed. We know what Hungary’s interests are — and that is why on April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.

Rhetorical / Propaganda Analysis

1️⃣ Construction of an Enemy Image

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt

“a Sorosist, Hungary-hating Brussels representative”
“Brussels sends its people here”
“stands with Zelensky”

Technique

The text connects several external actors into a single threatening bloc:

• Brussels
• George Soros
• Ukraine
• Zelensky

This is a classic political narrative:

➡️ external forces + internal political actors working together against the country.

Goal

• to weaken the legitimacy of the opponent
• to frame the political debate as a matter of “national defense”

Effect

The reader may easily feel that:

➡️ anyone who supports the opposition → serves foreign interests.

---

2️⃣ Internal Traitor Narrative

(traitor framing / internal enemy)

Excerpt

“Magyar Péter was exposed at his own march…”
“the leader of the left stands with Zelensky in everything”

Technique

The opposition politician is not presented simply as a political rival, but as:

➡️ someone serving foreign interests.

This rhetoric frames the political conflict as loyalty vs. betrayal.

Goal

• moral delegitimization
• portraying the opponent as unpatriotic

Effect

For the reader, the opposition becomes:

➡️ not an alternative
➡️ but a threat.

---

3️⃣ Fear-Based Scenario

(fear appeal / catastrophic framing)

Excerpt

“he would drag Hungary into the war”
“he would send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine”
“he would phase out cheap Russian energy”

Technique

The text chains together several negative consequences:

• war
• financial losses
• expensive energy

This is worst-case scenario rhetoric.

Goal

• mobilizing fear
• turning the electoral decision into an existential issue

Effect

The reader may feel that:

➡️ if the opposition wins → serious losses will follow.

---

4️⃣ Energy Security Narrative

(economic security framing)

Excerpt

“he would phase out cheap Russian energy”
“cheap utility prices protecting Hungarian families”

Technique

The political debate is linked to household costs.

Key elements:

• utility bills
• energy prices
• protection of families

Goal

to transform a geopolitical debate into an everyday cost-of-living issue.

Effect

The reader may conclude that:

➡️ opposition policy = higher utility costs.

---

5️⃣ Symbols Used as Evidence

(symbolic evidence framing)

Excerpt

“Ukrainian flags at their march”
“they sat in the European Parliament wearing Ukrainian T-shirts”

Technique

Symbols are presented as political evidence:

• flags
• clothing
• demonstration imagery

This is the rhetoric of visual proof.

Goal

a simple and easily understandable message:

➡️ “look at the images → the proof is there.”

Effect

Instead of complex political arguments,

➡️ visual associations dominate the interpretation.

---

6️⃣ “We Protect the Country” Narrative

(protector narrative / leadership framing)

Excerpt

“As long as Hungary has a national government…”
“we will stay out of the war”

Technique

The government is portrayed as a protective force:

• guarantor of peace
• defender of energy prices
• protector of national interests.

Goal

to frame the election as a security issue:

➡️ stability vs. risk.

Effect

The message suggests that:

➡️ the current government = security.

---

7️⃣ Campaign Mobilization

(electoral mobilization framing)

Excerpt

“that is why Fidesz is the safe choice”
“on April 12”

Technique

The entire narrative culminates in an electoral call.

This follows a classic campaign closing structure:

1. presenting the danger
2. identifying those responsible
3. offering the solution

➡️ “vote for us”.

Goal

political mobilization.

Effect

For the reader, the election appears as:

➡️ a strategic decision.

---

💡 Summary

The text follows a typical campaign rhetoric structure:

• external enemy (Brussels, Ukraine, Soros)
• internal actor as collaborator (Magyar Péter)
• fear-based consequences (war, expensive energy)
• government as protector
• electoral mobilization.

This creates an election narrative framed as a national security issue.