👉 So much for the Tisza Party’s “country of love.”

While the so-called “Fidesz attacks” invented by Tisza supporters are being disproven one after another, in reality my Fidesz colleagues and I are receiving death threats on a regular basis. This week, after a Tisza activist vandalized Fidesz posters in Budapest with a box cutter, he committed brutal physical violence against our activist who caught him in the act.

🗣 You may recall that Péter Magyar recently claimed that one of their activists had been attacked in Vác. But when the police attempted to question the woman, she herself admitted that no incident had taken place. In contrast, when our activist, Tamás, confronted someone tearing down posters, the Tisza perpetrator simply punched and assaulted him.

Only one question remains: where is Péter Magyar now? Now that one of his people resorted to physical aggression, he remains silent and does not condemn this unacceptable act.

🚨 It appears that, according to Péter Magyar, physical violence is acceptable as long as it is directed against a Fidesz supporter — and even kicking an activist lying on the ground fits into their so-called “country of love.”

Enough is enough. The clear-headed majority of Hungarians condemn all forms of violence.

🟠 We believe in arguments, not violence. On April 12, let us also pass judgment on Tisza’s aggression.

---

Do you remember the huge uproar a few weeks ago when Péter Magyar claimed that one of their activists had been beaten in Vác? Is this really where we are, dear Fidesz supporters? As it turned out, none of it was true. When the police attempted to take the woman’s statement, she herself said that no atrocity had occurred — no one insulted or harmed her, as confirmed by her official police testimony.

Now compare that to what happened two days ago, when a Fidesz activist was genuinely beaten by a Tisza activist. The Tisza supporter was walking along the street, cutting down Fidesz campaign posters with a blade. When Tamás, a young man, asked him what he was doing, the attacker simply punched him twice in the face. After Tamás fell to the ground, he appeared to strike him again. He hit him with one hand while holding a cutting tool in the other.

“He hit me! He hit me!”

Fortunately, the perpetrator has since been apprehended. But what is happening now? Péter Magyar is silent — the same Péter Magyar who repeatedly spreads false claims about alleged attacks against his activists and so-called Fidesz atrocities.

How long will you continue to fuel hatred? Now that something real has happened, there is complete silence. That, in my view, says everything about the Tisza Party’s so-called “country of love.”

🟠 Szentkirályi Alexandra’s Communication – Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis

Narrative:
“Tisza violence + hypocrisy → Fidesz as the rational, peaceful majority”

Actors:

• Szentkirályi Alexandra
• Magyar Péter
• Fidesz
• Tisza Párt

---

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

---

1️⃣ Moral Framing – “Country of Love” vs. “Violence”

📌 Technique:

• Ironic quotation marks: “country of love”
• Moral contrast: “we believe in arguments” vs. “they are violent”
• Turning the opponent’s own narrative against them

🎯 Goal:

To elevate the political dispute to a moral level.
The factual details of the incident become secondary to questioning the opponent’s moral credibility.

💥 Effect:

The audience does not weigh the specifics of the case but receives a simplified formula:
“They are hypocrites — we are decent.”

---

2️⃣ Isolated Incident → Systemic Characterization

📌 Technique:

• Generalizing a specific physical incident to the entire political community.
• Using “Tisza aggression” as a collective label.

🎯 Goal:

To transform an individual conflict into a broader political identity marker.

💥 Effect:

An individual’s action becomes party-level responsibility.

---

3️⃣ Contrast Framing – “False Claim vs. Real Attack”

📌 Technique:

• Recalling a previous, disputed incident.
• Presenting one side as having fabricated a story, while the other suffered “real violence.”
• Structuring the narrative as a direct comparison.

🎯 Goal:

To visibly tilt the credibility balance in favor of one side.

💥 Effect:

The audience internalizes a simple scheme:
“They lie → We are the true victims.”

---

4️⃣ Personalization – “Where Is Magyar Péter?”

📌 Technique:

• Dramatizing leadership responsibility.
• Suggesting that moral silence equals complicity.

🎯 Goal:

To turn the conflict into a question of personal accountability.

💥 Effect:

The political leader’s moral character becomes the focal point.

---

5️⃣ Emotional Dramatization – Video and Reactive Elements

📌 Technique:

• Repetition (“He hit him! He hit him!”)
• Raw emotional reactions
• Conveying a sense of chaos

🎯 Goal:

To trigger emotional identification in the audience.

💥 Effect:

Rational evaluation recedes, emotional response dominates.

---

🔎 Deeper Communication Pattern

This communication operates on multiple layers:

• Adopting a victim position
• Emphasizing moral superiority
• Assigning collective responsibility to the opponent
• Electoral mobilization (“On April 12, let’s pass judgment”)

This is not merely a reaction to an incident —
it is a political identity-reinforcement message.

---

🎯 Overall Picture

The objective is not the factual clarification of events, but:

• Establishing a moral framework
• Stabilizing an enemy image
• Emotionally mobilizing one’s own camp
• Activating voters

The debate therefore shifts away from what exactly happened and toward a broader symbolic question:

“Who represents order and peace — and who represents chaos?”

❗ We Demand the Restart of the Druzhba Oil Pipeline!

For weeks, Ukraine has been sabotaging our energy supply coming from the East, and it is also clear that our energy experts are being deliberately denied entry. They do not want an investigation, since they themselves have admitted that the pipeline remains closed purely for political reasons, in coordination with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition.

As there is obviously no technical obstacle to reopening the pipeline, we demand the dispatch of a fact-finding committee. The Hungarian government is doing everything possible to resolve this matter as soon as possible. Everyone must clearly understand why the Ukrainians are refusing to restart the Druzhba oil pipeline.

Hungary must not give in to pressure from either Zelensky or the West. Let us all stand up for our country, fill out the national petition, and send a clear message together:

❌ We SAY NO to further financing of the Russian–Ukrainian war!
❌ We SAY NO to making us pay for the functioning of the Ukrainian state over the next 10 years!
❌ We SAY NO to raising utility prices because of the war!

Enough of the Ukrainians playing games with us. We demand that a fact-finding committee be allowed to go and examine why they are unwilling to restart the Druzhba oil pipeline. They have admitted that, in coordination with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition, the oil shipments toward Hungary are being deliberately kept suspended. This is completely unacceptable and outrageous.

If you also believe this cannot be done to us, make your opinion heard — for example, by signing the national petition.

🧠 Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis

Narrative:
“Ukraine + Brussels + the Hungarian opposition coordinated energy sabotage → national resistance”

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

---

1️⃣ Sabotage framing (“has been sabotaging for weeks,” “deliberately not restarting”)

📌 Technique:

• Presenting intentionality as established fact
• Turning a technical dispute into a political conspiracy
• Treating alleged motivation as proven (“they admitted it”)

🎯 Goal:
To frame the energy supply issue not as a technical or geopolitical dispute, but as a hostile act.

💥 Effect:
The audience does not weigh data but perceives injustice → emotional identification.

---

2️⃣ External–internal conspiracy (“Brussels + Hungarian opposition coordinating”)

📌 Technique:

• Portraying multiple actors as a single coordinated will
• Linking “external pressure” with “internal betrayal”

🎯 Goal:
To transform both the election and the energy issue into a sovereignty struggle.

💥 Effect:
The issue becomes not about energy policy, but about loyalty:
“Who stands with Hungary?”

---

3️⃣ Denial of technical obstacles (“obviously there are no technical barriers”)

📌 Technique:

• Oversimplification of complex infrastructure
• Reversal of the burden of proof

🎯 Goal:
To eliminate uncertainty and create moral clarity.

💥 Effect:
The audience feels the situation is “completely clear,” and sees no need for further investigation.

---

4️⃣ Triple mobilizing negation (“WE SAY NO…”)

📌 Technique:

• Repetition
• Rhythmic, campaign-style listing
• Existential threats (utility prices, 10 years of financing, war)

🎯 Goal:
To create the emotional climax of the message and mobilize collective action.

💥 Effect:
The reader is transformed from a passive observer into an activated participant (petition).

---

5️⃣ Personalized resistance (“Hungary must not yield to Zelensky’s pressure”)

📌 Technique:

• Personalization of the conflict
• Dramatizing resistance against a specific leader

🎯 Goal:
To turn a geopolitical dispute into a test of strength between leaders.

💥 Effect:
The frame shifts from policy debate to strength vs. weakness.

---

⚙️ Professional dimension (briefly, calmly)

The operation of the Druzhba pipeline can be affected by multiple factors:

• transit disputes
• payment or sanctions-related issues
• technical damage
• political decisions
• insurance and liability questions

In the case of such infrastructure, it is rarely accurate to claim that “there are absolutely no technical obstacles” — although political decisions can indeed play a role. Without external, verifiable evidence, neither claim can automatically be treated as fact.

---

🎯 Overall picture

The text is not primarily about providing information, but about:

• emotional mobilization
• constructing a sovereignty framework
• generating collective identification

Its primary function is political activation rather than technical clarification.

We will retire the fake pollsters in April!

❗ While several left-wing analysts are publishing or circulating fictional results claiming that the left is leading, the leaked internal measurements speak for themselves. The confused commentaries of Endre Hann and Gábor Török are clearly aimed solely at influencing voters.

Facts, however, are stubborn things. The Hungarian people have both their hearts and minds in the right place — everyone feels that in times of danger we must place our trust in a strong, experienced leader who can say no to Brussels and the Ukrainians.

🟠 Only Viktor Orbán and Fidesz are the safe choice!

We are ahead by 26 points in Kisvárda, 22 in Pápa, 13 in Tarján, 10% in Mezőkövesd, Sziget-Szentmiklós and Baja, and 9 in Tapolca.
How are we standing 45 days before the finish? I think we are doing very well, and I believe we will stand even stronger as election day approaches. And I hope that “Uncle Bandi” Hann will finally go into retirement — where he belongs — together with his fake opinion polls.

🧠 Szentkirályi Alexandra’s Communication – Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis

Actors:

• Szentkirályi Alexandra
• Hann Endre
• Török Gábor
• Orbán Viktor
• Fidesz

Narrative:
“Fake opinion polls + left-wing manipulation → only experienced national leadership is the safe choice.”

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

---

1️⃣ Delegitimization and labeling – “fake pollsters”

📌 Technique:

• Discrediting labels (“fake pollsters”).
• Personalizing and mocking tone (“Uncle Bandi should retire”).
• Questioning the analysts’ motives.

🎯 Goal:
To undermine the legitimacy of public opinion polls before any substantive debate about the numbers can take place.

💥 Effect:
The audience no longer sees polling as a methodological issue, but as deliberate manipulation.

---

2️⃣ “Leaked internal measurements” – authority without evidence

📌 Technique:

• Vague source attribution (“leaked internal measurements”).
• Reference to unverifiable information.

🎯 Goal:
To counter public data with an alternative “hidden truth.”

💥 Effect:
Creates uncertainty: if all data can be manipulated, then only “our side’s” numbers are trustworthy.

---

3️⃣ Sovereignty framing – “able to say no to Brussels and the Ukrainians”

📌 Technique:

• Dramatization of external threats (“in an age of dangers”).
• Reframing the election as a sovereignty issue.
• Emotional identification (“the heart and mind of the Hungarian people”).

🎯 Goal:
To turn political competition into a matter of loyalty and national defense rather than policy programs.

💥 Effect:
Voters decide based on a sense of security rather than on data or policy comparisons.

---

4️⃣ Listing percentages – constructing a victory mood

📌 Technique:

• Mentioning specific towns and percentage leads.
• Creating a sense of forward momentum (“we are advancing”).

🎯 Goal:
To trigger the bandwagon effect.

💥 Effect:
Undecided voters are more likely to align with the perceived winning side.

---

5️⃣ Infantilization and mockery

📌 Technique:

• Diminutive, belittling address (“Uncle Bandi”).
• Age-based degradation (“he should retire”).

🎯 Goal:
To weaken the opponent’s professional credibility.

💥 Effect:
The debate shifts from professional substance to emotional confrontation.

---

🎯 Overall Picture

The communication operates on multiple levels:

• It delegitimizes data.
• It offers an alternative, unverifiable “internal truth.”
• It reframes the election as a matter of sovereignty and security.
• It projects an atmosphere of inevitable victory.
• It provokes emotional reactions through personalization.

This is a classic campaign formula:
uncertainty creation + external threat framing + strong leader narrative + bandwagon effect.

❌ Neither Brussels nor the Ukrainian president can decide our fate over our heads!

In his open letter, Viktor Orbán stated that Zelenskyy, “Brussels, and the Hungarian opposition are taking coordinated steps to bring a pro-Ukraine government to power in Hungary.” That is precisely why the Druzhba oil pipeline has not been reopened — which amounts to outright blackmail, since there are no technical obstacles in the background.

❗ We will not allow Hungary’s energy security to continue being attacked! The Prime Minister has called on Zelenskyy to immediately reopen the oil pipeline.

No matter that they have been working for four years to force Hungary into the war, they will not succeed. We are on the path of peace, and we will remain on it. That is why only Fidesz is the safe choice.

Now let’s take a look at what is happening regarding the Druzhba oil pipeline. By now, everyone probably knows that no oil is currently arriving through the Druzhba pipeline because Zelenskyy’s government is unwilling to restart deliveries. On Monday, both Hungary and Slovakia stated that if the Ukrainians’ claim is true — that there are technical or engineering obstacles — then they should allow Hungarian and Slovak experts to go there and examine what can be done to restart the flow. Interestingly enough, the Ukrainians did not want to allow this, which is at the very least suspicious, in my view.

So today Viktor Orbán wrote a letter to Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, urging him to immediately restore oil deliveries to Hungary via the Druzhba pipeline. He also made it clear that Hungary should not be drawn into the war between Russia and Ukraine. Although we sympathize with Ukraine, this is not our war, and Hungarians do not want to pay the price of it.

🧠 Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis

Actors:

• Szentkirályi Alexandra
• Orbán Viktor
• Volodimir Zelenszkij
• Fidesz
• European Union

Narrative:
“Brussels + Zelensky + the Hungarian opposition coordinate an attack → energy blackmail → Fidesz as the force defending peace”

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

---

1️⃣ External conspiracy framing – “coordinated actions”

📌 Technique:

• Linking three actors as a single, unified and coordinated will.
• The phrase “coordinated actions” suggests a hidden strategy.
• Dramatization of a sovereignty threat (“deciding over our heads”).

🎯 Goal:
To transform the election from a domestic political debate into a struggle for national self-determination.

💥 Effect:
The audience does not see a policy dispute, but a “foreign forces vs. Hungarians” conflict.

---

2️⃣ Existential threat – “attack on energy security”

📌 Technique:

• Framing the oil supply halt not as a technical or geopolitical issue, but as a deliberate attack.
• Use of the word “blackmail” to trigger moral outrage.
• Claiming “there is no technical obstacle” as a fact, without presenting evidence.

🎯 Goal:
To evoke fear and a sense of injustice.

💥 Effect:
Energy policy becomes an emotional issue rather than a technical or diplomatic debate.

---

3️⃣ Rhetoric of suspicion – “at the very least suspicious”

📌 Technique:

• Implication and indirect accusation.
• “Interestingly” as a suggestive cue.
• Turning lack of proof into grounds for suspicion.

🎯 Goal:
To strengthen distrust toward Ukraine.

💥 Effect:
The audience “draws its own conclusions,” which is psychologically more powerful than hearing a direct accusation.

---

4️⃣ Moral superiority framing – “we are on the path of peace”

📌 Technique:

• Moral division: peace-oriented “us” vs. war-oriented “them.”
• A simple, emotionally strong dichotomy.

🎯 Goal:
To turn a political choice into a moral choice.

💥 Effect:
Anyone not voting for the governing party is implicitly positioned on the side of war.

---

5️⃣ Savior narrative – “only Fidesz is the safe choice”

📌 Technique:

• Dramatizing the problem → monopolizing the solution.
• Presenting one single safe option.

🎯 Goal:
To delegitimize alternatives.

💥 Effect:
Political pluralism narrows into a binary of “security vs. danger.”

---

🎯 Overall Picture

This communication follows a classic crisis-framing pattern:

• Identifying an external threat
• Linking internal “traitors” to that threat
• Dramatizing existential danger
• Constructing a moral dichotomy
• Positioning a single protector

The emphasis is not on the objective condition of energy infrastructure, but on the sovereignty–fear–protection triangle.

🚨 “There is no war, there is no war, there is no war” – no matter how much Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz from Tisza keeps repeating this, all we have to do is look around the world to see what a huge lie it is. Brussels leaders are making statement after statement about sending troops to Ukraine and preparing for war by 2030. It sounds insane, but this is reality.

The Tisza politicians are already disregarding Hungarian interests and repeating the same lines as their bosses in Brussels and Kyiv: that weapons and as much money as possible should be sent to Ukraine, and that we should get involved in the war.

👉 All of this is supported by Péter Magyar and his allies while Ukraine is continuously blackmailing us — with threatening remarks and by refusing to reopen the Druzhba oil pipeline. So whose side are they really on?

“There is no war, there is no war, there is no war, there is no war — don’t you get it? Who are you, Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz? This stupid war topic always comes up. There’s no need to fear war. There is no war, there is no war, there is no war.”

Well, in our view, one only needs to look around the world to see the unfortunate fact that there is a war. Ukraine wants more. Some European countries have indicated that, if requested, they are ready to contribute even with troops. And it is also an unfortunate fact that the forces we are fighting against here in Hungary represent the position that Ukraine should be given weapons and money. But first and foremost, there is the €90 billion European Union loan. And they would even involve Hungary in the war.

It is particularly outrageous given that the Ukrainians no longer frame their demands as requests for support or for EU accession, but as outright blackmail — since they are unwilling to reopen the Druzhba oil pipeline. Today they received a firm response from Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. He called on them to change their anti-Hungarian policy. More respect for Hungary!

As long as there is a national government, we will protect Hungary’s energy supply and stay out of the war.

🟠 That is why Fidesz is the safe choice!

🟠 Communication of Szentkirályi Alexandra – Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis

Narrative:

“There is war + Brussels/Kyiv are blackmailing + Tisza betrays + Fidesz protects”

Actors:
Ruszin-Szendi Romulusz
Magyar Péter
Orbán Viktor
Fidesz

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

---

1️⃣ Repetition as a psychological weapon – “There is no war, there is no war…”

📌 Technique:

• Mocking, exaggerated repetition.
• Caricature-like oversimplification of the opponent’s position.
• Rhythmic chanting → emotional trigger.

🎯 Goal:
To ridicule and infantilize the opponent.

💥 Effect:
The audience does not perceive a substantive debate, but rather a “reality-denying” figure.

---

2️⃣ Dramatization of existential threat – “There is war in the world”

📌 Technique:

• Emphasis on global instability.
• “Just look around the world” → vague but powerful imagery.
• References to Europe preparing for war by 2030.

🎯 Goal:
To elevate a political issue into a matter of existential security.

💥 Effect:
The audience perceives not a policy debate, but a survival situation.

---

3️⃣ External control narrative – “Bosses in Brussels and Kyiv”

📌 Technique:

• Use of the word “boss” → image of subordination.
• Sovereignty framing.
• Multi-level enemy construction (Brussels + Kyiv).

🎯 Goal:
To turn the election into a question of loyalty:
“ Hungarian interest or foreign interest?”

💥 Effect:
The audience evaluates allegiance rather than policy programs.

---

4️⃣ Blackmail framing – “Druzhba oil pipeline”

📌 Technique:

• Energy supply framed as a national security issue.
• “Not a request, but blackmail” → moral reframing.
• Dramatization of external pressure.

🎯 Goal:
To place the conflict within a narrative of injustice.

💥 Effect:
Emotional outrage and defensive reflex.

---

5️⃣ Moral contrast – “We protect vs. they would drag us in”

📌 Technique:

• Binary division.
• “We stay out of the war” as a peace promise.
• “Fidesz is the safe choice” → stability framing.

🎯 Goal:
To position the party as the solution to fear.

💥 Effect:
Fear → desire for security → political support.

---

🎯 Overall Picture

This communication pattern:

• Builds a sense of threat (war, energy, blackmail)
• Portrays the opponent as serving foreign interests
• Generates moral outrage
• Concludes with a promise of security

A classic fear–protection narrative:

“There is danger → they are part of the danger → we will protect you.”