Four years ago, the Russian–Ukrainian war began. Brussels and Kyiv, winking at each other and working together with Tisza, are trying to drag Hungary into the war as well!

This is also part of being a candidate. While they continue to blackmail us from Kyiv and Brussels, we are working here to make sure everyone sees that Fidesz is the safe choice. Let us not forget: the war in Ukraine started four years ago, and even now EU leaders are in Kyiv, coordinating with their Hungarian partners, Tisza, to figure out how to involve Hungary in the war. We will not allow this.

🧠 Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis – “War Anniversary + External Collusion + Siege Mentality” Narrative

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

1️⃣ Anniversary Framing – “It started four years ago”

📌 Technique:
Emotional activation of the fourth anniversary of the war.

🎯 Goal:
– Reactivate collective fatigue and anxiety
– Link the current political campaign to a historically weighty event

💥 Effect:
The message feels less like campaign communication and more like a “historic moment.”
This is temporal framing + trauma activation.

2️⃣ External Collusion Narrative – “Brussels and Kyiv, winking together with Tisza”

📌 Technique:
– Merging external actors into a single bloc
– The “winking” metaphor (suggesting a secret plan)
– Linking the domestic opponent to foreign powers

🎯 Goal:
– Reframe the opposition as a sovereignty threat
– Present the election not as a domestic political contest, but as a geopolitical struggle

💥 Effect:
Debate shifts from policy issues → to a loyalty test.
This is classic foreign collusion framing.

3️⃣ Existential Threat – “Dragging Hungary into the war”

📌 Technique:
– Visualizing direct military involvement
– Strong consequences presented without concrete evidence

🎯 Goal:
– Elevate the election to a survival-level decision
– Override rational evaluation with emotional reaction

💥 Effect:
Voters do not deliberate — they defend.
This is fear framing + survival framing.

4️⃣ Blackmail Frame – “They are blackmailing us from Kyiv and Brussels”

📌 Technique:
– Adopting a victim role
– Reframing economic/political disputes as moral aggression

🎯 Goal:
– Place one’s own position on moral high ground
– Present external pressure as unjust coercion

💥 Effect:
The government appears as a “defender,” not an “initiator.”

5️⃣ Dual Contrast – “They negotiate in Kyiv – we work here”

📌 Technique:
– External elites vs. hardworking nation
– “We are working here” as a populist, grounded framing device

🎯 Goal:
– Build moral contrast
– Oppose “elites” to “ordinary people at home”

💥 Effect:
Strengthens the us vs. them dynamic.

6️⃣ Closing – “Fidesz is the safe choice”

📌 Technique:
– Fear → solution → exclusive option
– Simplified decision formula

🎯 Goal:
Reduce a complex geopolitical situation to a binary choice:
– peace = Fidesz
– war = the opposition

💥 Effect:
This follows the classic problem–reaction–solution model.

🎯 Summary

This message combines multiple layered techniques:

• Historical emotional activation
• External conspiracy framing
• Existential threat construction
• Victim narrative
• Populist contrast
• Exclusive solution framing

Core strategy:
To frame the election not as political competition, but as an act of national self-defense.

Brussels and Kyiv would drag Hungary into the war as well. We will not allow it!

This is how it started in Brussels: the headquarters of the European Union was illuminated in blue and yellow on the fourth anniversary of the outbreak of the war. If it were up to them, they would drag us into it too. We will not allow it.

They are worried about their families, they are worried about their grandchildren – many people in North Pest are afraid of the war and its consequences. For them as well, Fidesz is the only safe choice!

I’m very afraid. And there is something to be afraid of. There really is, because the world has gone mad. Good afternoon! Hello! The lady just said, “Oh, I hope that was a good ‘oh’.” Hello! Balázs Németh! We’re collecting supporting signatures – I didn’t even mention it, but for me it’s even more important that we at least meet and that I can introduce myself, because I’m new in the area. But all the more enthusiastic.

I’m very afraid. And there is something to be afraid of, because the world has gone crazy. I fear for my family, because for me personally, you could say it doesn’t really matter anymore. Well, please don’t say that. What’s happening now is frightening. I’m thinking, for example, about what’s going on regarding oil. Yes. It will be alright. It will be alright. I kindly ask you. I know you will do everything you can. This district is a very difficult district.

érvekkel.

🧠 Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis – “Elderly Person + Fear + Reassuring Leader” Narrative

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

1️⃣ Featuring an elderly woman – moral authentication

📌 Technique:
– Involving an elderly woman (“good day”, respectful greeting)
– Grandmother/grandchildren framing
– Personal, emotional expression

🎯 Goal:
– To present the political message as coming from a “defenseless, pure source”
– To make criticism morally more difficult (“How could anyone argue with a grandmother?”)

💥 Effect:
The viewer does not see a political act, but a “concerned grandmother.”
This is a classic case of emotional authenticity framing.

2️⃣ Repetition of fear – “There is something to fear”

📌 Technique:
– Verbal repetition of fear
– “The world has gone mad” – diffuse, non-specific threat
– War + oil + uncertainty

🎯 Goal:
– To maintain a general, floating sense of threat
– To turn the election into a survival decision

💥 Effect:
Rational evaluation moves into the background.
The voter is not looking for a policy program, but for a sense of security.

3️⃣ “For me it doesn’t matter anymore” – self-sacrificing generational frame

📌 Technique:
– Suggestion of self-sacrifice by an elderly person
– “For me it doesn’t matter, but for the grandchildren…”

🎯 Goal:
– To create moral pressure
– To frame the decision as intergenerational responsibility

💥 Effect:
Political debate transforms into a moral obligation.

4️⃣ The candidate as a reassuring paternal figure

📌 Technique:
– “It will be alright.”
– Paternalistic, calming tone
– Physical closeness, handshake, polite formulas

🎯 Goal:
– The candidate = stability and control
– Positioning him as the embodiment of order in a chaotic world

💥 Effect:
The choice becomes psychological rather than policy-based:
“Next to whom do I feel safe?”

5️⃣ External threat → internal solution

📌 Technique:
– War
– Oil
– “Difficult district” dramatization

🎯 Goal:
– To elevate a local election into a global crisis frame
– To position Fidesz as the only stable force

💥 Effect:
Binary framing:
chaos vs. security
a world gone mad vs. we keep things under control

🧩 Summary

This is a textbook campaign scene:

– Elderly, worried grandmother
– Fear of war
– Protection of grandchildren
– Reassuring candidate
– “Only Fidesz is the safe choice”

The political message is delivered through emotion rather than through policy arguments.

There is an oil blockade against Hungary! They want fuel to cost 1,000 forints per liter, to cause chaos, and to bring down the government because of it. Péter Magyar’s friends are currently negotiating in Kyiv.

These campaign posters could not have been placed in a better location than next to a gas station. There is an oil blockade against Hungary. They want fuel to cost 1,000 forints, to create chaos, and to topple the government. Péter Magyar’s friends are negotiating in Kyiv even now. Brussels and Ukraine are working to install a Ukraine-friendly government in Hungary. For them, anything is worth it — even making fuel cost 1,000 forints here at home.

🧠 Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis – The “Oil Blockade + Price Panic + External Interference” Narrative

The message follows a classic crisis-framing structure:
external attack + economic fear + internal traitor + exclusive blame shifting.

Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect

1️⃣ Crisis Dramaturgy – “Oil Blockade Against Hungary”

Kyiv
Brussels

📌 Technique:
– Use of the word “blockade” (a quasi-military term)
– Framing an economic dispute as an existential attack
– Merging external actors (“Brussels and Ukraine”) into a single hostile force

🎯 Goal:
– To frame fuel prices not as a market or logistical issue, but as a national siege.
– To push government responsibility into the background: this is not a policy outcome, but an “attack.”

💥 Effect:
The audience does not ask:
“What are the alternative supply routes?”
Instead, they feel:
“They are trying to strangle the country.”

This is siege mentality framing.

2️⃣ Price Panic – “1000 Forint Fuel”

📌 Technique:
– A concrete, shocking number
– Dramatizing a future negative scenario
– Repetition (“it will be 1000 forints”)

🎯 Goal:
– To construct a sense of existential economic threat
– To turn the election into a survival decision

💥 Effect:
Voters do not weigh policy programs; they calculate loss:
“What will happen to the family budget?”

This is a classic fear appeal.

3️⃣ Internal Traitor Narrative – “Friends of Magyar Péter in Kyiv”

📌 Technique:
– Linking an external enemy with an internal collaborator
– The phrase “pro-Ukrainian puppet government”
– Creating a moral loyalty test

🎯 Goal:
– To portray the opponent not as an alternative political actor, but as a representative of foreign interests.
– To transform the election into a sovereignty struggle.

💥 Effect:
Political debate shifts from programs to loyalty:
“Whose side are you on?”

4️⃣ Responsibility Shifting – Silence About Alternative Routes

📌 Technique:
– Dramatizing a single supply channel
– Omitting discussion of other procurement options
– Reducing a complex energy market issue into a binary narrative

🎯 Goal:
– If only one pipeline matters, then its disruption equals external aggression.
– If alternative routes exist, then it becomes a matter of economic policy decisions.

💥 Effect:
The audience does not evaluate diversification, contracts, or market pricing mechanisms.
They see only a simplified story:
“They shut it off, we suffer.”

5️⃣ Location Symbolism – Speaking Next to a Gas Station

📌 Technique:
– Visual context (gas station backdrop)
– Aligning the message with a tangible everyday experience

🎯 Goal:
– To make the fear immediate and concrete
– To shift from abstract geopolitics to daily refueling reality

💥 Effect:
The message feels personal and immediate.

🎯 Summary – Narrative Structure

External attack
→ Price panic (1000 HUF)
→ Internal collaborator
→ Government as protector

This creates a closed narrative loop:

If fuel is expensive → it’s because of the enemy.
If there is an enemy → strong leadership is needed.
If strong leadership is needed → there is no alternative.