The notorious Zoltán Tarr has now blurted out to Brussels’ newspaper, Politico, that a group is currently preparing a plan for them to sabotage MOL and get rid of its leadership.
Yes, you heard that right. Classic communist tactics.
❗ And of course, once again it’s about MOL. Do we remember what happened to MOL the last time we were not in government?
Gyurcsány sold it to the Austrians, and then the Orbán government had to buy it back.
The fact that MOL is in Hungarian ownership and has been able to expand over the past decade is an enormous treasure for every Hungarian.
👉 And a huge curse for every foreign oil giant, like Shell.
That is why Zoltán Tarr wants to dismantle MOL. That is why “Captain Shell” and Péter Magyar want to phase out cheap Russian energy.
They are nothing but lobbyists for foreign companies. They don’t care how or for how much you heat your home or fill up your tank.
They want to make the largest Hungarian company impossible to operate, to bleed it dry, so that Shell can rake in hundreds of billions.
🟠 This cannot be undone four years later.
Use your head, protect your wallet — vote Fidesz!
On April 12, Viktor Orbán is the safe choice.
1️⃣ Construction of an Enemy Image
(external enemy framing / scapegoating)
Excerpt
“Tarr Zoltán would destroy MOL.” “Shell captain and Péter Magyar.” “foreign oil giants.”
Technique
The speech connects several actors into a single narrative of enemies:
opposition politician (Tarr Zoltán)
opposition leader (Péter Magyar)
foreign corporation (Shell)
“Brussels”
This follows a classic propaganda pattern:
➡️ external interests + internal traitors
Goal
delegitimize the political opponent
suggest that they do not represent Hungarian interests
Effect
The audience may easily feel that:
➡️ supporting the opposition = supporting foreign interests.
2️⃣ National Wealth Protection Narrative
(ownership protection narrative)
Excerpt
“MOL is in Hungarian ownership.” “This is an enormous treasure for every Hungarian.”
Technique
The political debate is framed as protecting national property.
MOL is presented not simply as a company, but as:
➡️ a national asset.
Goal
create emotional attachment
portray government policy as protection
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ supporting the government = protecting Hungarian national wealth.
3️⃣ Conspiracy Narrative
(conspiracy framing)
Excerpt
“A plan is being prepared to sabotage MOL.” “They want to deal with the leadership.”
Technique
The text suggests the existence of a secret plan:
“a group”
“a plan”
“a Brussels newspaper”
This creates a conspiracy frame.
Goal
generate a sense of threat
demonize the motives of the political opponent
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ there is organized action being planned against Hungary.
4️⃣ Manipulation of Historical Example
(selective historical framing)
Excerpt
“Gyurcsány sold it to the Austrians.”
Technique
A past political conflict is invoked to:
reinforce the present narrative
create a parallel between the past and the present
Goal
warn voters with past mistakes
place current political opponents in the same category
Effect
➡️ “If the opposition comes to power → the country will be sold again.”
5️⃣ Economic Fear Appeal
(economic fear appeal)
Excerpt
“They don’t care how much you pay for heating or fuel.” “They would make hundreds of billions.”
Technique
The message focuses on everyday costs:
heating
fuel
household expenses
Goal
turn a political issue into a pocketbook issue
Effect
➡️ victory of the opponent = a more expensive life.
6️⃣ Mobilization Slogan
(political call to action)
Excerpt
“Use your head, use your wallet, vote Fidesz!” “Viktor Orbán is the safe choice!”
Technique
Short, memorable campaign slogans.
Goal
mobilize voters
simplify the political message
Effect
➡️ reduces a complex political debate to a simple electoral choice.
✅ Summary
The text combines several classic campaign techniques:
enemy construction
protection of national assets
conspiracy narrative
economic fear appeal
historical comparison
electoral mobilization
Overall, it is a strongly emotion-driven campaign message built around the frame of:
We will never allow anyone to take away what belongs to the Hungarian people. We will protect our borders, our families, and our independence. We will defend our country from war and from those in Brussels and Kyiv who want to impose their will on us.
On April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice!
Go Fidesz! Go Fidesz! And I also make this clear: no matter what tricks they try, we will never allow them to take from you what is yours and what you are entitled to.
What belongs to the Hungarian people will remain the property of the Hungarian people. Neither international big capital, nor Brussels, nor Ukraine will be allowed to plunder Hungary.
We will protect what we have, we will protect our future, and we will defend everything that all of you have worked for.
“We will never allow them to take away what belongs to Hungarians.” “What belongs to Hungarians will remain Hungarian.”
Technique
The political message is framed as protecting people’s property and rights. Government policy is presented as if its main purpose were defending what belongs to Hungarians.
Key elements
“what belongs to Hungarians”
“take away”
“we will protect”
Goal
to create a moral framework
to present political decisions as questions of fairness and justice
Effect
The audience may feel that
➡️ supporting the government = protecting their own property and rights.
2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy
(external enemy framing / scapegoating)
Excerpt
“agents of Brussels and Kyiv” “neither Brussels nor Ukraine can pocket Hungary’s wealth”
Technique
The political conflict is projected onto external actors.
These are presented as adversaries:
Brussels
Ukraine
“international big capital”
They are portrayed not as political partners, but as threatening forces.
Goal
to simplify the conflict
to reduce political debate to a “us vs. them” narrative
Effect
The message implies that
➡️ anyone who does not support the government may be seen as serving foreign interests.
3️⃣ Defender narrative
(defender framing)
Excerpt
“We will protect our borders, our families, and our independence.”
Technique
The political actor is positioned as a protector.
The values highlighted include:
borders
families
independence
peace
All of these are fundamental security-related values.
Goal
to present the government as the guarantor of security and stability.
Effect
The message may lead voters to feel that
➡️ the political choice is fundamentally a question of security.
4️⃣ Fear-based mobilization
(fear appeal)
Excerpt
“We will protect our country from war.” “Hungary cannot be looted.”
Technique
The speech highlights two primary threats:
war
economic exploitation
Goal
emotional mobilization
strengthening political support
Effect
Voters may feel that
➡️ a victory by the political opponent could endanger the country.
5️⃣ Simplified campaign slogan
(campaign simplification)
Excerpt
“On April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.”
Technique
The political decision is reduced to a simple and memorable sentence.
This is a typical campaign tool:
short
repeatable
easy to remember
Goal
to enable rapid spread of the message.
Effect
Such phrases tend to stick easily in voters’ minds.
Summary
The speech’s communication strategy is built around four main elements:
1️⃣ Ownership protection narrative – “what belongs to Hungarians” 2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy – Brussels, Ukraine 3️⃣ Defender role – the government as the guarantor of security 4️⃣ Fear-based mobilization – war and economic threat
This type of rhetoric is typical of campaign communication, using emotional and identity-based framing to mobilize voters.
The German government has openly threatened Hungary! If we do not accept that Zelensky has shut down the oil pipeline, and if we do not approve the military loan intended for Ukraine, then it’s over for us! Yeah, right 🤡
Zoltán Tarr let it slip again 😱 A Tisza government would forbid MOL from buying cheap Russian crude oil.
Oh no! Poor Zoltán Tarr again. Someone should hold Péter Magyar back before he causes any harm to his own vice-president. It wasn’t enough that Tarr was the one who originally let it slip that Tisza is full of secrets and that they are not revealing their real plans to voters.
And now Tarr was showing off to Politico, the big Brussels-based outlet, saying that if a Tisza government comes to power, they would persuade — or even pressure — MOL’s leadership to break away from cheap Russian energy and stop purchasing Russian crude oil.
Zoltán Tarr, Zoltán Tarr… why do you always have to be so honest?
1️⃣ Straw Man Argument
(straw man argument)
Claim in the text
“A Tisza government would forbid MOL from buying cheap Russian crude oil.”
Technique
The text attributes a stronger, more radical claim to Zoltán Tarr than what he actually said.
The original statement was more likely about things such as:
reducing dependence on Russian energy
diversifying energy sources
following EU energy policy directions
The communication reframes this into a much more extreme claim:
➡️ “they will ban cheap Russian oil.”
Goal
portray the opponent’s policy as more extreme than it actually is
create an easier target for criticism
Effect
The reader may feel that:
➡️ “the opposition wants more expensive energy.”
2️⃣ Economic Fear Framing
(economic fear framing)
Key phrase in the text
“cheap Russian crude oil”
Technique
The message immediately turns the debate into a financial issue.
Implicit logic:
Russian oil = cheap
moving away from it = expensive
opposition = higher energy prices
Goal
Create the perception in voters’ minds that:
➡️ “if they come to power → utility bills and fuel prices will rise.”
Effect
A political debate becomes a fear about everyday living costs.
3️⃣ Mockery and Personal Discrediting
(mockery / ridicule framing)
Excerpt
“Oh no! Poor Zoltán Tarr again.” “Zoltán Tarr, Zoltán Tarr, why do you always have to be so honest?”
Technique
Instead of discussing policy, the communication uses personal ridicule.
Goal
make the person appear ridiculous
weaken their credibility
Effect
Readers may feel that:
➡️ “this person is incompetent or keeps slipping up.”
4️⃣ Hidden Agenda Narrative
(hidden agenda framing)
Excerpt
“Tisza is full of secrets and does not reveal its real plans.”
Technique
The text suggests that
➡️ there is a hidden political program.
This is a classic campaign framing:
“what they say” vs.
“what they really want.”
Goal
Create distrust toward the political opponent.
Effect
Readers may feel that:
➡️ “they must be hiding something.”
5️⃣ Coercion Narrative
(coercion framing)
Excerpt
“they would pressure or force MOL’s leadership…”
Technique
Political decision-making is framed not as policy, but as
➡️ forceful intervention into a company’s operations.
Goal
Portray the opponent’s economic policy as authoritarian.
In Short
Main communication narrative
➡️ “The opposition secretly wants more expensive energy and would force MOL to abandon Russian oil.”
Tools used
straw man argument
economic fear framing
mockery
hidden agenda narrative
coercion framing
✅ Key point
The text does not prove that Zoltán Tarr explicitly said:
“we would ban MOL from buying Russian oil.”
It is more accurately a political interpretation or campaign reframing of his statement.
My prediction came true! 😉 It was the biggest Peace March (Békemenet) ever, and in four weeks a similarly large Fidesz victory can follow! 🧡
We commit that even in such a chaotic world we will preserve Hungary as an island of security and stability.
On March 15, at the largest Peace March of all time, hundreds of thousands stood up for our country and sent a message to Brussels, Kyiv, and the Tisza Party: Hungary does not want war.
Brussels decided to continue the war instead of choosing peace, and now it is preparing for war. The leaders in Brussels first committed themselves to unconditional financial and military support for Ukraine, and now they have even set a target date for Europe’s entry into the war.
In his holiday speech, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán made it clear:
“We must achieve a historic victory, because the next government will bear a historic responsibility.”
The position of the national government is clear: we will not allow ourselves to be dragged into the war, we will not send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine, and we will not pay more for energy.
This is why Brussels and Kyiv need a government that would carry out all their war-related demands. And they have already found their candidate and ally: the party of Péter Magyar.
Just as on March 15, on April 12 we must again say no to demands that go against Hungarian interests.
“We must renew the anti-war alliance formed at the previous election. We commit that even in such a turbulent world we will preserve Hungary as an island of security and stability,” the Prime Minister declared.
We will stay out of the war, we will not pay Ukraine, and we will not allow a puppet government from Kyiv to be installed over us.
Fidesz is the safe choice.
It will certainly be even bigger than the previous ones — that’s my prediction already. And it is very important, because before every election we can feel how much weight it carries when many of us are there.
But I truly feel that the pressure on Hungary, the external attacks we are facing now, are unprecedented. And because of this, our peaceful and calm response must also be unprecedented — large and strong.
So I really hope that this will be the case today.
Analysis of the Communication and Propaganda Techniques in the Text
1️⃣ Mass legitimacy narrative
(bandwagon effect / mass legitimacy)
Excerpt
“It was the largest Peace March ever.” “Hundreds of thousands stood up for our country.”
Technique
The political position is justified by the size of the crowd. The communication suggests:
➡️ if many people support it → then it must be the correct side.
Goal
strengthen social legitimacy
influence undecided voters
create the feeling that “the majority is with us”
Effect
Readers may easily feel that:
➡️ “if so many people support it, then they must be right.”
2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy
(external enemy framing / scapegoating)
Excerpt
“Brussels and Kyiv need a government that…” “external attack against Hungary”
Technique
The conflict is framed around external actors:
Brussels
Kyiv
the opposition
These actors are not presented as political partners in debate, but as threatening forces.
Goal
present domestic political conflict as an international attack
frame political opponents as representatives of foreign interests
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ anyone supporting the opposition → supports foreign forces.
3️⃣ Fear appeal
(fear appeal)
Excerpt
“Brussels is preparing for war.” “A target date has already been set for Europe’s entry into the war.”
Technique
The message suggests an imminent danger.
The conflict is framed not as a political debate, but as:
➡️ a war threat.
Goal
trigger emotional reactions
amplify the perceived importance of the election
Effect
People may feel that:
➡️ if they choose the wrong option → there will be war.
4️⃣ “Us vs. them” framing
(binary framing / polarization)
Excerpt
“We will stay out of the war.” “They support the war.”
Technique
The political landscape is simplified into two sides:
side
meaning
government
peace
opposition
war
Goal
to simplify the political debate.
Effect
Complex issues disappear, and the choice becomes:
➡️ “peace or war.”
5️⃣ Mobilization of national identity
(national identity framing)
Excerpt
“We will preserve Hungary as an island of security and calm.”
Technique
The political position is presented as a national mission.
Key elements
defending Hungary
sovereignty
national interest
Goal
to place political support on an emotional foundation.
Effect
The decision appears not only as a political choice but as:
➡️ a patriotic duty.
6️⃣ Delegitimization of the political opponent
(delegitimization framing)
Excerpt
“to install a Kyiv puppet government on our necks”
Technique
The opposition is not presented as a normal political rival, but as:
➡️ a foreign puppet.
Goal
undermine trust
discredit the political opponent
Effect
The opposition appears not as an alternative, but as:
➡️ a threat.
7️⃣ Electoral mobilization
(mobilization rhetoric)
Excerpt
“On April 12 we must also say no.”
Technique
The speech transforms a mass rally into electoral mobilization.
Goal
convert participants into voters
turn the experience of the crowd into political capital
Effect
The event becomes a campaign tool.
Overall picture
The communication constructs a classic political narrative:
Structure
1️⃣ large crowd → legitimacy 2️⃣ external enemies → Brussels / Kyiv 3️⃣ internal opponent → “puppet government” 4️⃣ threat → war 5️⃣ solution → the current government
This is a highly mobilizing, emotionally driven political message that uses:
❌ We will not go to war with Brussels! ❌ We will not allow Ukraine into the EU! ❌ We will not give up cheap energy!
Hungarian youth will not die for Ukraine — they will live for Hungary!
🟠 Only Fidesz and Viktor Orbán guarantee all of this!
Four weeks from now, on Sunday, Fidesz is the safe choice.
The situation is that this bicycle is heading straight toward a cliff. A stick has to be put into the spokes of that bicycle, because we do not want to fall into the abyss together with the whole Brussels madness that is pedaling toward death.
And the truth is that Anita Orbán and her allies are doing exactly that. They want to join that European mass like obedient little scouts — or rather like “little pioneers” (that’s probably the better comparison — apologies to the scouts, I used to be one myself). In other words, they want to take part in something that for the past 16 years we have tried with all our strength to protect Hungary from.
We did not want to go along with the gender ideology, we did not want to follow the path of pro-migration policies, we do not want to give up even a small piece of our sovereignty, and we do not want to give up cheap Russian energy just so that everyone ends up paying much more.
The reality is that the Tisza Party, through many statements and leaked materials, has already admitted that they want to push Hungary back under the Brussels boot.
But we have 16 years of work in freeing Hungary from that. We can finally breathe free air, stand upright, and say:
“Thank you very much — we will decide for ourselves what is good for Hungary, and we do not ask for others to interfere or tell us what to do.”
1️⃣ Construction of an External Enemy
(external enemy framing / scapegoating)
Excerpt: “We will not go to war with Brussels!” “We will not allow Ukraine into the EU!” “…the whole Brussels madness… cycling toward death…”
Technique: The text clearly constructs an external enemy:
Brussels
Ukraine
the “European mass”
These actors are not presented as partners or political actors, but as threatening and destructive forces.
Goal:
to create fear
to simplify the political debate into a “us vs. them” logic
to reframe complex issues as external attacks
Effect: The reader may feel that:
➡️ anyone who does not support Fidesz supports foreign forces ➡️ the country is under siege
2️⃣ Fear Appeal and Existential Threat
(fear appeal / existential threat framing)
Excerpt: “Hungarian young people will not die for Ukraine…” “…cycling toward death…” “…falling into the abyss.”
Technique: The message does not present a simple political disagreement, but elevates the issue to a life-and-death choice. Words like “die,” “death,” and “abyss” trigger strong emotional reactions.
Goal:
to create a sense of urgency
to suppress rational evaluation
to suggest that the wrong political decision could have fatal consequences
Effect: The audience may feel that they are not choosing between political programs but that:
➡️ survival is at stake ➡️ the country must be “defended” immediately
3️⃣ False Dichotomy
(false dichotomy / black-and-white framing)
Excerpt: “Only Fidesz and Viktor Orbán can guarantee all of this!” “In four weeks on Sunday, Fidesz is the safe choice!”
Technique: The speech reduces reality to two options only:
Fidesz and security
or Brussels, Ukraine, death, and loss of sovereignty
There is no nuance and no legitimate alternative.
Goal:
to exclude all other political options
to turn the election into a moral obligation
to present loyalty as the only “safe” choice
Effect: The reader may feel that:
➡️ considering other options is not acceptable ➡️ supporting Fidesz is the only responsible decision
4️⃣ Delegitimizing the Political Opponent
(delegitimization / traitor framing)
Excerpt: “Orbán Anita’s people are doing exactly this.” “…like good little pioneers…” “…they want to push Hungary back under the Brussels boot.”
Technique: The opponent is not portrayed as simply mistaken, but as subordinate actors serving foreign interests. The metaphors “pioneers” and “Brussels’ boot” are humiliating and belittling.
Goal:
to undermine the opponent’s credibility
to portray them as traitorous or weak
to strengthen the moral superiority of the speaker’s camp
Effect: The message suggests that:
➡️ the opposition is not an independent political actor ➡️ but merely an executor of foreign will
5️⃣ Use of Strong Emotional Metaphors
(emotional metaphor / vivid imagery)
Excerpt: “this bicycle is heading toward a cliff” “a stick must be shoved into the spokes” “under the Brussels boot”
Technique: The speech uses vivid imagery to transform abstract political issues into simple and easily imaginable scenes.
What is happening here?
EU policy = a bicycle heading toward a cliff
resistance = sticking a stick into the spokes
the opponent = a submissive executor
Hungary = a body oppressed and then liberated
Goal:
to trigger quick emotional identification
to simplify political reality
to anchor the narrative through dramatic imagery
Effect: The audience remembers images rather than arguments:
➡️ the abyss ➡️ death ➡️ the boot ➡️ liberation
These emotional images are much more powerful than factual reasoning.
6️⃣ Presenting One’s Own Side as a Heroic Savior
(hero framing / savior narrative)
Excerpt: “For 16 years we have been working to free Hungary…” “…we can breathe free air…” “…we can stand up straight…”
Technique: The speaker’s political side is framed as a liberating force that rescued the country from external oppression.
Goal:
to give historical significance to the government’s rule
to portray the leader and party as saviors
to evoke emotional gratitude
Effect: The audience may feel that:
➡️ they have already received something from this political force ➡️ and therefore owe loyalty in return
7️⃣ Sovereignty as the Ultimate Political Slogan
(sovereignty framing / national identity mobilization)
Excerpt: “…we will decide what is good for us…” “…we do not want others interfering in this…”
Technique: Every political issue is translated into the language of sovereignty. Thus economic, foreign policy, EU, and energy issues become a struggle for national self-determination.
Goal:
to elevate political debate into a national identity issue
to morally burden the opposing side
to frame the speaker’s side as the patriotic camp
Effect: The audience may feel that:
➡️ agreeing with the speech means being patriotic ➡️ disagreeing means weakening national sovereignty
Technique: The text bundles several unrelated topics into one threatening narrative:
gender
migration
Brussels
Ukraine
energy
sovereignty
This is a classic culture-war panic construction.
Goal:
to combine multiple fears into one enemy image
to create the sense that everything is under threat at once
to achieve total emotional mobilization
Effect: The audience perceives not separate policy issues but a single civilizational threat.
9️⃣ Repetition of Claims Without Evidence
(assertion without evidence / repetition effect)
Excerpt: “The Tisza Party has admitted this in many ways…” “…in their leaked materials…”
Technique: Serious claims are made without evidence, explanation, or concrete detail. It is enough to say that something was “admitted,” “leaked,” or “revealed.”
Goal:
to create suspicion
to plant ready-made conclusions in the audience’s mind
to reinforce prejudice without fact-checking
Effect: Through repetition, people may begin to feel that:
➡️ “there must be something to it”
even if no evidence is presented.
🔟 Dehumanizing and Contemptuous Language
(dehumanizing / contempt signaling)
Excerpt: “Brussels madness” “European mass” “pioneers” “the Brussels boot”
Technique: The speech does not merely argue but expresses contempt. Opponents and external actors are described with mocking and degrading language.
Goal:
to create emotional distance
to legitimize contempt toward the opponent
to turn hostility into a shared group identity
Effect: The audience no longer sees the other side as a legitimate debate partner but as a group that can be mocked, excluded, or directed against.
Summary
This text represents classic political propaganda, because it:
constructs an external enemy
generates fear and existential anxiety
creates a false choice
portrays the opponent as a servant of foreign interests
frames its own side as a national savior
repeats serious accusations without evidence
uses mocking and degrading language
And yes, it also appeals to hostility, because the emotional engine of the message is not simply persuasion but:
anger
fear
contempt
enemy construction
In other words, this is not just a campaign message but polarizing, emotionally charged mobilization propaganda built on enemy narratives.
The Tisza is a pro-Ukrainian party. There can be no question about that. It does not defend the interests of Hungarians; it wants to serve Kyiv and Brussels instead.
A TikTok message from Jani, as a side note to yesterday. What do Ukrainians have to do with March 15? What is the Ukrainian flag doing here? Even if I were a Tisza supporter, why would Ukraine have to be brought into a national holiday? Well, well, well, well, well! Right? Common sense is watching on TikTok too. The reason there was a Ukrainian flag at the Tisza march is because Tisza is a pro-Ukrainian, Ukraine-friendly political force. If a Tisza government were formed, it would look after Ukraine’s interests, not the interests of the Hungarian people. So, Jani, first of all, thanks for the message, but you’d do better not to become a Tisza supporter.
1️⃣ Construction of an Enemy Image
(external enemy framing / scapegoating)
Excerpt
“The Tisza is a pro-Ukrainian party… it wants to serve Kyiv and Brussels.”
Technique
The political opponent is portrayed as serving foreign interests. The narrative connects three actors:
Ukraine
Brussels
the opposition party (Tisza)
This is a classic propaganda pattern: → “they are not working for their own country.”
Goal
to delegitimize the political opponent
to portray them as unpatriotic
to create moral distrust
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ anyone supporting Tisza → supports foreign interests ➡️ anyone opposing it → stands on the national side
2️⃣ False Causal Relationship
(false cause / oversimplification)
Excerpt
“There was a Ukrainian flag at the Tisza march because Tisza is a pro-Ukrainian party.”
Technique
A general political conclusion is drawn from a single visual element (a flag).
Logically, this is:
an unproven causal connection
an overgeneralization
Goal
➡️ to provide a simple, easy-to-understand narrative ➡️ to close a complex political question with a single “proof”
Effect
To the viewer, the conclusion may appear obvious and self-evident.
3️⃣ “Common Sense Question” Rhetoric
(common sense framing / rhetorical questioning)
Excerpt
“What do Ukrainians have to do with March 15?”
Technique
The speaker asks a question appealing to “common sense.”
This is a rhetorical device:
not a real question but one that leads the audience toward a predetermined answer.
Goal
➡️ to present the message as “self-evident” ➡️ to make the opposing view appear irrational
Effect
People may think:
“If the question is framed like that, it really does seem strange.”
4️⃣ “Ordinary Person Testimony” Technique
(testimonial / ordinary person endorsement)
Excerpt
“A TikTok message from Jani…”
Technique
The message is introduced through the story of an ordinary person.
This is a classic propaganda device:
the message is not delivered by a politician but by “a regular person.”
Goal
➡️ to increase perceived authenticity ➡️ to present the political message as a “popular opinion”
Effect
The message appears less like propaganda and more like a genuine social reaction.
5️⃣ Reinforcement Through Repetition
(repetition technique)
Excerpt
“pro-Ukrainian party”, “pro-Ukraine political force”
Technique
The key claim is repeated multiple times.
Repetition is one of the most powerful tools in propaganda.
Goal
➡️ to fix the narrative in the audience’s mind ➡️ to create an automatic association
Effect
In the audience’s mind the association may become:
Tisza = Ukraine
6️⃣ Polarizing Identity Frame
(identity polarization)
Excerpt
“it does not defend the interests of the Hungarian people”
Technique
Politics is divided into two opposing camps:
Hungarian interests
foreign interests
Goal
➡️ to create an identity-based conflict ➡️ to strengthen political loyalty
Effect
The debate no longer appears to be about policies, but about:
“who stands with the Hungarian people.”
7️⃣ Social Pressure on Supporters
(social pressure)
Excerpt
“He’d better not become a Tisza supporter.”
Technique
A subtle form of social pressure:
potential supporters are warned or discouraged.
Goal
➡️ to create uncertainty among potential supporters ➡️ to weaken the legitimacy of the opposing side
Effect
Followers may feel:
➡️ “it is not socially acceptable to belong to that group.”
Overall Picture
The text builds a classic political narrative based on three main elements:
1️⃣ an external enemy (Ukraine + Brussels) 2️⃣ an internal “servant” or collaborator (Tisza) 3️⃣ national identity (Hungarian interests)
This is a typical pattern of polarization-based propaganda.
I was a first-timer at the very front of the Peace March, and it was a fantastic experience! Thank you to every Hungarian who loves their homeland and came out today! We showed what the national side is made of! 🧡💪🏻
This time I was at the front for a change. I had never been at the front during the Peace March before — I usually stayed somewhere in the middle or at the back, comfortably blending in. But the number of people I saw this time… honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen that many people at any Peace March before. The atmosphere was absolutely brilliant, and the weather was wonderful.
What I see here is that there are a huge number of people who are sincerely and genuinely fed up with Ukraine and Brussels trying to tell us Hungarians what is good for us, and trying to force a government on us through pressure, threats, and blackmail — a government that would represent Ukrainian and Brussels interests. That is what I see in this crowd: that the Hungarian people’s love of freedom could not be defeated in 1848, nor in 1956, nor will it be defeated in 2026.
1️⃣ Personal experience as credibility
(personal testimony / authenticity framing)
Excerpt
“I was at the front of the Peace March for the first time… it was a fantastic experience!”
Technique
The political message is presented as a personal experience. This is a classic communication method:
not framed as a political claim, but as a personal account.
Goal
➡️ increase credibility ➡️ create the impression that the message is “not propaganda, but an experience.”
Effect
The reader may feel:
“She was there, so it must be true.”
2️⃣ Mass legitimacy
(mass legitimacy / bandwagon effect)
Excerpt
“The number of people I saw… I have never seen at any Peace March before.”
Technique
The communication emphasizes the size of the crowd.
This is the classic bandwagon effect:
“If so many people are there, then this must be the right side.”
Goal
➡️ legitimize political support ➡️ influence undecided voters
Do you see this, Zelensky? This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians. We could not be broken before, and we will not be broken now. We will not give in to blackmail or the pressure of an oil blockade.
Together with the national government, we stand on the side of peace, and no kind of blackmail will change that.
Do you see this, Ukrainians? Do you see it, Zelensky? This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians. And you think you can scare us with an oil blockade, with blackmail, or by threatening our leaders? Use your common sense and stop this.
Anyone who wants to break the Hungarians would have had to wake up much earlier — several hundred years earlier.
“This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians.”
Technique
The speech places the current political conflict within the long arc of Hungarian history. The phrase “thousand-year-old state” is one of the strongest symbols of national identity.
Key elements
thousand-year-old state
historical continuity
national survival
Goal
➡️ to give the political position historical legitimacy ➡️ to elevate the conflict to a civilizational level
Effect
The reader may feel that
this is not merely a current political dispute,
but rather a defense of Hungarian history itself.
2️⃣ Narrative of National Resistance
(resilience framing / defiance rhetoric)
Excerpt
“They have never been able to break us, and they never will.”
Technique
The communication invokes the narrative of resistance and survival that is often associated with Hungarian history.
This reflects a common rhetorical pattern referencing periods such as:
the Mongol invasion
the Ottoman occupation
the Habsburg era
the Soviet occupation
Goal
➡️ to create strong collective pride ➡️ to identify the political stance with national resilience
Effect
The message implies that:
those who support it → are part of the national resistance
those who oppose it → weaken that resistance.
3️⃣ Construction of an External Enemy
(external enemy framing)
Excerpt
“Do you see this, Zelensky?” “Do you see this, Ukrainians?”
Technique
The communication identifies a specific external actor in the conflict.
This simplifies the political situation into a binary framework:
us ↔ them
Key elements
direct reference to Zelensky
collective reference to “Ukrainians”
Goal
➡️ to create a clear conflict frame ➡️ to strengthen internal political unity
Effect
Readers may feel that
the country is under external pressure or attack.
4️⃣ Framing of Blackmail and Threat
(victim framing / coercion narrative)
Excerpt
“We will not yield to blackmail or to the pressure of an oil blockade.”
Technique
The speech portrays Hungary as a party under pressure.
Key words
blackmail
blockade
threat
Goal
➡️ to legitimize resistance ➡️ to establish moral superiority
Effect
The message suggests that
Hungary is acting defensively, not aggressively.
5️⃣ Peace Narrative
(peace framing)
Excerpt
“We stand on the side of peace.”
Technique
The political stance is framed as a moral category.
Implicit framing:
us → peace
opponents → conflict
Goal
➡️ to establish moral legitimacy
Effect
Readers may feel that
supporting this position becomes a moral duty.
6️⃣ Direct Address
(direct address rhetoric)
Excerpt
“Do you see this, Zelensky?” “Use your common sense.”
Technique
The speech directly addresses the opponent.
This dramatises the conflict and makes it more personal.
Goal
➡️ to create stronger rhetorical impact ➡️ to frame the situation almost like a political “duel”
Effect
The message becomes
more confrontational
more emotionally intense.
7️⃣ Hyperbolic Historical Reference
(hyperbolic historical reference)
Excerpt
“Anyone who wants to break the Hungarians would have to wake up much earlier — several centuries earlier.”
Technique
The speech uses exaggerated historical reference to reinforce the narrative.
This reflects the classic rhetorical motif:
“Hungarians cannot be defeated.”
Goal
➡️ to evoke emotional identification ➡️ to increase collective pride
Effect
For the audience, the speech can appear
inspiring
mobilizing.
Overall Structure
The message builds on three main narratives:
1️⃣ National identity
thousand-year-old state
historical survival
2️⃣ External threat
Zelensky
blackmail
blockade
3️⃣ Moral positioning
we stand on the side of peace
we resist pressure
This structure represents typical mobilizing political communication, which:
activates national identity
dramatizes an external conflict
builds a moral framework around the political stance.
