The Tisza propagandist Noár made a film that portrays life in Hungary under Viktor Orbán’s government as terrible, horrible, and indescribably bad.
A teacher in Kispest liked it so much that he immediately wanted to screen it for students at school, and even invited the director—who, using rather primitive terminology, referred to Fidesz supporters and the government as a “symptom” and a “disease.”
However, the school principal asked that the film only be shown after the campaign, since it is a clearly party-political film, and there is no place for such content in a school during an already heated election period.
In response, Noár’s “Lenin boys” did not disappoint expectations, and since then the brave principal—who only wanted peace and calm in his school—has experienced what “the country of love” of Péter Magyar’s camp really looks like.
They insult him, slander him, and humiliate him—all because he wanted to remain impartial.
These are everyday examples that clearly show how deeply the hatred and blind rage flowing from Péter Magyar for the past two years have taken root.
Let’s say no to this! Let’s show the power of love and unity next Sunday!
From here as well, even as a stranger, I would like to thank Principal László Tömpe for his courageous stance. He is the head of Deák Ferenc Secondary School in Kispest, and he said no to allowing Tisza propaganda—Noár-style propaganda—into his school.
What happened was that a teacher at the school decided it would be a good idea, in the heat of an election campaign, to screen this film for students, a film created by the propagandist Áron Molnár. The teacher also intended to invite the director to speak at the school.
The director himself described the film by saying: “we didn’t make a film about the symptom, but about the disease.” So if anyone had doubts about what kind of discussion would have taken place with the students, I think that should now be clear.
After the principal made his decision—and I would like to quote him directly, because he expressed it very appropriately—he said:
“I am responsible for keeping students away from daily political struggles, especially in such a heated period. Therefore, I asked the head of the film club not to screen the film during this time; naturally, it can be shown later. Seeing and experiencing the hateful reactions from external actors confirmed that I made the right decision.”
Following this decision, from this so-called “country of love,” from Noár’s side, a truly disgusting hate campaign was launched against him.
I would also like to thank him for keeping this propaganda out of our children’s lives. There is already far too much division in politics today, and it would be much better if this did not spill over toward students.
I feel very uncomfortable when I see that at certain stops of Viktor Orbán’s countryside tours, young students and children shout incoherently into the camera things like “Fidesz should die” and similar expressions.
I don’t think this is necessary, and it would be much better for our children to experience even this campaign in a school environment where division is not dominant, but rather what unites us as a nation.
So once again, I thank Principal Tömpe for his courage and stance, and I wish him strength in enduring the attacks that will clearly continue from this so-called “loving country” of Tisza supporters.
👉 Main narrative:
- “TISZA / Molnár Áron = hatred, aggression, propaganda”
- “School = under threat (politics is infiltrating)”
- “Principal = brave protector”
- “Fidesz side = peace, calm, protection of children”
👉 Underlying formula:
children + school + protection + enemy image
→ “they are attacking the children, we are protecting them”
🔥 Core point
➡️ it’s not about the content of the film
➡️ it’s about framing it as “dangerous propaganda for children”
➡️ goal: trigger moral outrage + defensive instinct
🔍 Manipulation techniques
1️⃣ Involving children = strongest emotional trigger
👉 Technique:
“children”, “school”, “students”
👉 Goal:
➡️ immediate emotional reaction
➡️ “this must be stopped” feeling
👉 Effect:
not a political debate → moral panic
2️⃣ Demonization of the opponent
👉 Example:
“hate campaign”, “disgusting”, “Lenin boys”
👉 Technique:
opponent ≠ different opinion → morally corrupt
👉 Goal:
➡️ total delegitimization
➡️ shutting down dialogue
3️⃣ Single case → generalization
👉 Technique:
one school + one teacher → “this is what TISZA is like”
👉 Goal:
➡️ stigmatize an entire political group
👉 Effect:
simple, easily spread narrative
4️⃣ “Protective leader” framing
👉 Example:
principal as “brave”, “protecting children”
👉 Technique:
protector framing
👉 Goal:
➡️ create identification
➡️ decision framed as “good vs bad”
5️⃣ Timing dramatization
👉 Example:
“in the middle of the campaign”
👉 Technique:
amplifying the situation
👉 Goal:
➡️ increase perceived severity
➡️ “especially dangerous right now”
6️⃣ False dichotomy
👉 Message:
- either “peaceful school”
- or “political propaganda”
👉 Goal:
➡️ eliminate middle ground
➡️ force a binary choice
⚡ Summary (one sentence)
This is a classic “protecting children vs. dangerous propaganda” framing, using a single case to construct a full political enemy image, driven by strong emotional amplification.
