“There are people who use the Christmas season to spread hatred and hostility. We know exactly who they are — but now let me show you how we spend the days before Christmas. I think that would be really great.”
🎭 1️⃣ Projection (what they do → they blame others for)
“Some people use even the Christmas period for spreading hate.”
🔍 Real function:
Not describing — labeling Not proving — insinuating Not naming — but everyone is expected to “know” who he means
👉 Classic narcissistic trick:
“I don’t do it — they do.”
while in reality he and his circle thrive on constant hate-fueling.
This is projection: relocating one’s own behavior onto the “enemy.”
🧠 2️⃣ Moral superiority posturing
“We know who they are…”
This is an in-group signal:
“We — the good ones” “They — the bad ones”
📌 Message:
If you’re with us → you’re moral
If you’re against us → you’re hateful
No debate, no nuance, no facts — only moral judgment.
🎬 3️⃣ Stage shift: “But we, on the other hand…”
“…let me show you how we spend the days before Christmas.”
This is image repair.
🧩 What’s happening?
The previous accusation is never proven
They simply cut to a new scene:
hate → love conflict → cozy Christmas mood
👉 A narrative escape:
“I won’t address criticism — I’ll distract you with a feel-good picture.”
🔄 4️⃣ The full formula in one sentence
“We are not spreading hate — the haters are the ones who criticize us.”
This equals:
self-absolution
blame-shifting
emotional blackmail (“How dare you criticize during Christmas?”)
🧨 Why is this dangerous?
Because it:
normalizes their own aggression
demonizes dissent
turns every differing opinion into a moral attack
Meanwhile:
They start the division Then they play the victim.
It’s a problem that they live in such a different world. Thankfully, I don’t have many relatives who support Tisza, but the few that do are on such a completely different wavelength that you just can’t have a normal conversation with them. Honestly, they’ll even take a comment like “this schnitzel tastes good” as proof that you’re a Fidesz shill.
🎭 1️⃣ Constructing a Caricature Enemy
“Relatives who support Tisza… they live in a different universe”
👉 The opponent is not a debate partner but a cartoonish figure. It doesn’t refute concrete arguments — it assigns a mental state (“you literally can’t talk to them”).
Function:
portray the opponent as irrational,
shut down debate before it even starts.
🧠 2️⃣ Normalizing Cognitive Isolation
“Luckily I don’t have many relatives who support Tisza”
👉 Extending political tribal logic into family relationships. Implicit message:
Dear Tisza supporters, your beloved country will cost you even the shirts off your backs — and even if you don’t believe it, it will still happen. Just trust your own eyes already.
For example, here’s little Gábor, and here’s Vaszilij. Because of the two of them, we would have to pay 36,000 forints a year in taxes if Tisza’s grand economic plan came to life. But that’s not even the worst part. Let’s stick to the most ordinary concerns of everyday people: when you’re sad because Tisza is turning this into a shitty country, how will you get drunk at home in silence if booze becomes so expensive that you won’t even be able to buy a bottle of La Fiesta?
Of course, the comment-prime-minister’s marketing agent has already stated that this is all lies, none of it is true — but soon you will experience on your own skin that they’ll strip not only the country, but every single Hungarian down to the bone. It’s written down, black and white.
Naturally, we all knew what the official explanation of the Savior would be: that the Fidesz actually wrote and leaked this, and that this economic plan doesn’t even exist. But the truth is: this economic plan does exist — and it will ruin your lives.
You can sling mud at us as much as you like — we still won’t let them turn this wonderful country into a poor, slum-ridden Hungary.
1️⃣ Vision of Total Impoverishment
“…you’ll even lose the shirt on your back…”
It predicts absolute, irreversible disaster.
There is no condition, no “if,” no alternative. 👉 Goal: paralyzing fear, not rational evaluation.
2️⃣ Fictional Example (“Gáborka and Vaszilij”)
“…36,000 forints in taxes per year after the two of them…”
A number that looks precise → illusion of credibility.
No source, no law, no calculation shown. 👉 Technique: number-mysticism + relatable characters = “this will happen to you.”
3️⃣ Lifestyle Humiliation
“…how will you get drunk at home…”
The voter is infantilized and reduced to an alcoholic caricature.
Not economic policy — cultural contempt. 👉 Message: “You are not a citizen, you are driven by primitive impulses.”
4️⃣ Pre-emptive Neutralization of Fact-Checking
“…the marketing agent PM will say it’s a lie…”
Any rebuttal is discredited in advance.
Whatever comes later automatically becomes “excuse.” 👉 One of propaganda’s strongest shields.
5️⃣ “Written Black and White” — Without a Source
Classic mythical-document rhetoric:
no page no title no link 👉 The narrative of a “secret but absolutely real paper.”
6️⃣ Messianic Framing
“…the official explanation of The Saviour…”
Religious metaphor → cult-like logic.
Dissent = lack of faith, not a rational stance. 👉 Polarization: “We are the enlightened ones.”
7️⃣ Moral Self-Absolution & Hero Posturing
“…we still won’t let it happen…”
Our side = heroic, morally superior. Other side = “slum Hungary.” 👉 Moral blackmail: if you’re not with us, you’re against the country.
🧠 Overall Picture
This is not journalism. It’s:
fear-mongering
dehumanization
stacking unsubstantiated claims
building immunity against criticism
The goal isn’t persuasion — it’s triggering reflexes:
Anger. Shame. Fear. And ultimately, obedience/loyalty.
I’ve noticed something strange. So we are being branded as “pedo-Fidesz,” even though everyone who had anything to do with, for example, the pardon scandal resigned from their positions and withdrew from public life—most of them without even being pressured to do so. They did this partly because they themselves acknowledged their “guilt,” and partly because we on the right also made it clear in countless writings why the case was unacceptable and why everyone who granted clemency to a man who was not himself a pedophile but assisted the crimes of a pedophile must bear responsibility. According to the uninformed, we are the “pedo-Fidesz” ones because under the Orbán government Gábor Kaleta—who had been made a diplomat under the previous administration—was exposed, and he received a shockingly light sentence from judges who otherwise protest against the government and of whom quite a few were caught having downloaded the Tisza app. Isn’t that strange? We are being called “pedo-Fidesz” by people who didn’t even blink when we reported that adult men, dressed up as women in grotesque makeup, are already presenting themselves to children in kindergartens abroad. We spoke out against this as well; you stayed silent. Now I read that, according to Magyar Peti, the authorities never even declared that Márk Lakatos had abused a 13-year-old child at the time. That, however, is a blatant lie. Magyar Peti’s sect calls us “pedo-Fidesz,” while it has been established that one of “Uncle” Ervin Nagy’s closest friends abused a 13-year-old child. No matter how much anyone lies about it, there is documentation of this. No one has distanced themselves from that friend, and the “child-protection” influencers are still silent. Then along comes the great, brave DPK “questioner,” who asks Orbán and Lázár why they don’t protect every single child on Earth, and when the minister and the prime minister explain point by point that they cannot prevent every crime but they can punish them, the “brave warrior” suddenly goes deaf and no longer hears the answer. The fact is that there are figures and statistics showing how many proven pedophile offenders have been sent to prison since 2010, and this is because they are now actually being caught and punished. They may not receive life sentences, but once these parasites are released, alongside the public pedophile registry we wish them “good luck” integrating back into society. So I don’t know who the pedophile-apologists are: those who put actual offenders behind bars and hold accountable those connected to such crimes, or those who are unwilling even to name the crimes of a specific, proven pedophile because he happens to be their activist at the moment. And as for those who see pedophile crimes behind every bush, I recommend a psychologist. This is not a party-political or campaign topic. A normal person condemns such crimes, supports having the police investigate every case and the courts pass judgment, rather than using it as a comment-storm weapon simply because they dislike the opinion they’ve read. (As for L. Márk, the fact that such crimes could be subject to the statute of limitations is disgustingly outrageous. Unfortunately, laws cannot be changed retroactively, but at least as of the summer of 2024 it has been fixed in law that sexual crimes committed against minors never expire.)
The text is a classic, multi-layered piece of propaganda, even though it superficially appeals to “facts” and “moral outrage.” Below is a structured evaluation from rhetorical and logical perspectives.
1️⃣ Core framing: victimhood + counterattack
The fundamental claim of the entire text is this:
“We are being baselessly labeled as ‘pedo-Fidesz,’ while in fact we are the real protectors of children.”
This does not examine whether the criticism is justified; instead, it starts with moral self-exoneration. This is a typical propaganda opening: it does not clarify the issue, it defends identity.
2️⃣ Deliberate conflation of concepts (a classic trick)
This is a rhetorical maneuver designed to suggest that the system is functioning properly, while in reality it was the system itself that produced the scandal.
3️⃣ Selective shifting of blame (judges, “the left,” apps)
This is one of the most serious manipulations:
“They received light sentences from judges who protest and downloaded the Tisza app.”
❌ Unproven connections ❌ Scapegoating ❌ Delegitimization of the justice system
This is dangerous propaganda because it:
undermines trust in the rule of law,
attempts to interpret judicial decisions through political loyalty.
4️⃣ Classic “whataboutism” (deflection)
Whenever the text should address concrete cases, it shifts the topic:
“abroad, makeup-wearing men in kindergartens”
“but others did worse”
“you stayed silent”
👉 Completely unrelated to the Hungarian cases in question 👉 Emotional panic-mongering, not fact-finding
This is a core pattern of Russian–Hungarian propaganda: if you can’t defend the issue → drag the debate into moral mud-slinging.
5️⃣ Double standards — revealing by their own logic
One key sentence stands out:
“There was no final court ruling.”
Then, just a few lines later:
“There is paperwork proving it.”
❗ From the same author:
at one moment, only a final verdict is acceptable;
at another, a mere “document” is sufficient.
This internal contradiction is typical of propaganda: 👉 the standard depends entirely on who is being accused.
6️⃣ Dehumanizing language (deliberate emotional overload)
Words used:
“animal”
“vermin”
“disgusting”
“needs a psychologist”
This language:
shuts down debate,
forces emotional reactions,
blocks sober analysis.
The goal is not truth, but tribal identification.
7️⃣ False concluding dilemma
The ending presents a false binary:
“Who are the pedophile apologists? Us, who put them in prison, or them?”
This is a logical distortion, because:
the criticism is not against punishment,
it is against the political whitewashing of responsibility.
The two do not exclude each other.
8️⃣ The only true statement — and even that is incidental
At the end, this claim is correct:
“Sexual crimes against minors do not expire under the statute of limitations.”
✔️ Factually true ❌ But it does not absolve the handling of past cases ❌ And it does not answer the pardon scandal
Summary — in one sentence
This is not a text about child protection; it is political identity defense built on panic-mongering, deflection, and double standards.
The goal is:
not truth,
not the victims,
but the preservation of the “us vs. them” narrative.
**“You know what’s outrageous? Even the Czech European leader and even the NATO Secretary General are unable to snap out of their war psychosis just a few days before Christmas. It was no coincidence that EU leaders tried—literally a week before Christmas—to force member states to take on a joint EU loan in order to support Ukraine. They pushed the plan through, but thanks to Viktor Orbán, Hungary will not have to participate in this loan—and that is a huge achievement.
But then Mark Rutte, the Secretary General of NATO, spoke out and said that many European countries have already indicated they would be ready to send troops to the war.
So now I ask all those who, in recent times, accused us of being the only ones talking about war, or questioned why the Hungarian government is putting up war-related billboards across the country, and why Viktor Orbán keeps saying there is a risk of war in Europe. Well—this is exactly why. You see, it’s not only Viktor Orbán who is talking about the danger of war; many others are too. The difference is that we interpret how this danger should be ended or resolved differently.
We believe—together with Viktor Orbán—that the danger of war can only be ended if the parties make peace. Most European Union member states either do not want this at all or do not understand it at all. And now the NATO Secretary General is talking about knowing European countries that would be willing to send troops to the front.
We are not among those countries, and we do not want to be. Hungary will not send troops into a war that has nothing to do with us, that clearly cannot be solved with weapons, and that will have severe and unforeseeable consequences if it continues for much longer. We will not allow Hungarian men to be sent to the Ukrainian front. We will not allow them to fight another country’s war. And we will not allow Hungary to be dragged even deeper—economically as well—into this war just because it brings huge profits for someone.
The NATO Secretary General’s statement is extremely frightening and, frankly, outrageous. It is also terrifying how many countries have been fed the idea that they must take part in this war and defeat Vladimir Putin and Russia militarily. Some EU member states are heading in a very, very wrong direction, and it is deeply alarming to see where this mindset could lead the European Union. We may not like what we end up seeing.
So once again, let us be clear: this is not how wars are ended, and it will not help European people—or Hungarian people—if EU member states become involved in this war both economically and militarily. This is a terrible direction, and it is tragic that just a few days before Christmas, this is what we still have to be talking about.”**
Well, maybe someday, if it comes up, we can remember it then.
*It’s been a tough week. Brussels, tear gas, water cannons, then a long journey to Szeged. But it seems it was worth it, because in just these seven days alone, 1 MILLION of you were curious about my content. 😱
Huge thanks — even to the laughing-emoji sectarians, who spread my content even with their mocking reactions. Maybe some of them also have acquaintances who enjoy thinking and independent opinions 🤷🏻♀️
So a kiss to them too, especially during Advent.
And now I’ve switched into full Christmas-preparation mode. My traditional gingerbread is baking: half for the kids, half for the tree.
I wish everyone joyful preparations, and once again, thank you all so gratefully for your attention ❤️❤️❤️🇭🇺*
Dóra Dezse-Zelenka, journalist, is in Brussels, Belgium.
🥲 Péter Magyar says that Viktor Orbán is “clowning around” in Brussels. This is said by the leader of an online sham party who, over the past year and a half as an MEP, has done nothing but feed his own sect and flood the noisy world of social media with inflammatory fake news. That is all he has “done” since appearing on the scene as the opposition’s newest messiah. That is the full achievement of this silk-boy, “comment prime minister,” who mocks Orbán as a clown.
Meanwhile, the supposedly “clowning” Orbán is fighting here in Brussels to prevent the lovers of war — the Brussels leadership — from dragging every European taxpayer financially into another country’s war, and into the “support” of a country that has been economically devastated to the ground.
Orbán does this because this is not the right path. The Brussels leaders are on a misguided road, clearly illustrated by today’s farmers’ protest in front of the European Parliament. A road that does not support the tax-paying citizens of EU member states, but instead squeezes them because of the money flowing into the Ukrainian “black hole.”
The position of the Brussels leadership is essentially that European people should break themselves so that they can now pursue moral posturing in Ukraine and seize opportunities for personal enrichment. It really is that simple.
This is what everyone from “Auntie” von der Leyen onward is currently lobbying for — all those “willing” ones who are willing to sacrifice us because they need even more money. Sanctions on Russian energy, joint borrowing, and farmers being pushed to the brink all point in this same direction.
But this cannot be allowed.
According to the reality-deniers living in Péter Magyar’s world, discussing all this, reporting on it, and vetoing these plans amounts to “clowning around.” Fine. Then keep denying reality.
