Category: nemeth balazs : Words vs. Facts

I call on Anna Müller, the Tisza Party’s North Pest candidate, to step forward, apologize to the voters, and remove from her activists those who supported the dog-feces stunt.

Disgusting, revolting, outrageous… I’ll show you. They filled the entire mailbox with dog feces. I keep receiving shocked and sympathetic messages after it turned out that by yesterday someone had stuffed and smeared that red mailbox—where we are collecting messages from voters in North Pest—with dog feces. Well, there you have it: this is the so-called “Tisza land of love.”

There is evidence that Tisza activists supported this vile action that crossed every line and humiliated North Pest voters. Therefore, I call on Anna Müller, Brussels’ candidate in North Pest, to step forward, apologize to the voters of North Pest, and immediately remove from her activist team those who did this.

They cannot sabotage the red mailbox initiative, but everyone should remember this image. This is the Tisza “land of love.”

🔴 1️⃣ Claim instead of evidence

The key sentence in the text:

“There is proof that Tisza activists supported it.”

But there is no:

• name
• face
• footage
• police report
• identified person

👉 This is not proof — it’s an accusation presented as a finished fact.
In propaganda this is a golden rule: make the claim first, and the audience won’t ask for evidence afterward.

---

🧠 2️⃣ One (unknown) act → stigmatizing an entire political community

A mailbox being vandalized =

➡️ “Tisza’s ‘country of love’”
➡️ “their activists”
➡️ “these kinds of people”

This is collective guilt. Same logic as:

one person does something → “they are all like this.”

This is an emotional operation, not a logical one.

---

🎭 3️⃣ Triggering disgust = shutting down thinking

The “dog feces” detail is not accidental.

It’s one of the strongest psychological triggers:

• disgust
• contamination
• humiliation

When this kicks in, the brain doesn’t analyze — it looks for an enemy.

That’s why the text keeps repeating:

“filled it up”
“smeared it”
“disgusting”
“filthy”

This is emotional shock, not information.

---

🧩 4️⃣ Victim role + moral superiority

The constructed image:

Them	Us
barbaric	civilized
they soil things	we develop
they hate	“country of love” (ironically)

This is the structure of a moral tale, not an investigation of reality.

---

🎯 5️⃣ The goal is not the incident, but the image

The focus is not on:

• who did it
• how it happened
• what the evidence is

But on:

“everyone should remember this image.”

This is pure campaign technique:
📌 visual memory = emotional label = political opponent

---

💬 How to flip this back (if you want to respond)

The weak point is obvious:

lack of evidence + collective accusation.

For example:

It’s interesting how, after an act by an unknown perpetrator, an entire political community is immediately blamed — without evidence.
Camera footage? Identified person? Police case?
Or is this just another attempt to manufacture emotion with a disgusting image instead of facts?

This doesn’t defend vandalism — it challenges manipulation.

---

🧠 In summary

This text:

does not prove
does not investigate
does not question

Instead it:

✔️ generates emotion
✔️ names an enemy
✔️ delivers a moral judgment
✔️ extracts political benefit

This is a textbook example of how propaganda works.

The Tisza supporters are hate-mongering, barbaric savages. They filled the red mailbox—where we collect development ideas from people living in North Pest—with dog feces. I’ll show you.

They stuffed the entire mailbox with dog feces. They filled it with dog feces.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is the so-called “country of Tisza love.”

They smeared dog feces all over the red mailbox that we placed two days ago on the main square in Újpalota, because we are waiting for feedback from North Pest residents about what should be developed in this part of the city.

We will now clean it, and of course they will not be able to sabotage our red mailbox initiative.

Down below is what we have taken out of the mailbox so far—here it is as I find it. A huge number of messages came in, truly. The people of Újpalota are genuinely concerned about what should be developed in the district.

And what concerns the Tisza supporters? Being barbaric animals. I’ll show you.

They filled the entire mailbox with dog feces. They filled the mailbox with dog feces.

This is who they are. They cannot sabotage the red mailbox initiative—but everyone should remember this image. This is the country of “Tisza love.” This is what we can expect from them after April as well.

🔥 1️⃣ Scapegoating without evidence

“Tisza supporters filled it with dog excrement.”

❗ There is no evidence.
What we do not hear about:

• camera footage
• witnesses
• a police report
• a recording
• an identified person

👉 Yet it is presented as a proven fact.

This is one of propaganda’s basic rules:
state it first → later nobody asks for proof.

---

🧠 2️⃣ One act → demonizing an entire group

From one unknown perpetrator we immediately get:

“Tisza supporters = barbaric animals”

This is classic collective stigmatization.

The goal is not to solve the incident.
The goal is to manufacture an enemy image.

The logic:

one mailbox → excrement → opposition voters = animals

This is dehumanization.
This is the step after which anything can be blamed on someone.

---

🎭 3️⃣ Disgust as a political weapon

The dog excrement is not accidental.

It activates one of the strongest human reflexes:
👉 biological disgust

Disgust:

• shuts down rational thinking
• triggers immediate emotional rejection
• links the opponent to images of “dirty, contaminating, low”

This is not debate — it’s a nervous system trigger.

---

🧱 4️⃣ Constructing the victim role

Narrative:

“We are collecting residents’ opinions.”
“They attack with filth.”

So the frame becomes:

Them	Us
barbarians	builders
hatred	care
destruction	community

This is a moral stage where the roles are pre-assigned.

---

🗳️ 5️⃣ Hidden electoral message

Then comes the key line:

“This is what we can expect from them after April as well.”

This is not about a mailbox.

It means:

👉 If they come to power, chaos, aggression, and low behavior will come.

This is a fear-based future scenario, without evidence.

---

🎯 What actually happened (summary)

Technique	Purpose
Accusation without proof	Designating an enemy
Disgust trigger	Emotional shock
Dehumanization	Moral permission for hatred
Victim positioning	Moral superiority
Future threat projection	Activating voter fear

---

⚠️ Most important:

This is not political debate.
This is emotional conditioning.

The goal of this kind of speech is not to make you believe what happened.

It is to make you feel who you should hate.

And that is the difference between democracy and propaganda.

The details of the January utility price cap are being released. It’s a tough day for Tisza supporters ✌️

Good morning, Tisza trolls! Today’s a difficult day. The details of the January utility price cap are coming out. And you’ll have to try to convince people that paying more for utilities would somehow be better than paying less. Good luck with that!

Let’s make it clear: the Tisza Party is a left-wing party. Tisza’s candidates are Brussels’ candidates. It’s that simple.

The left-wing catfight has started here in North Pest. Balázs Barkóczi, the Democratic Coalition’s candidate, called Anna Müller, the Tisza Party’s candidate, right-wing. So let’s clear this up. The two “right-wing” candidates in North Pest would supposedly be Fidesz’s Balázs Németh and Tisza’s Anna Müller. Well, let’s set the record straight.

The Tisza Party’s candidates are Brussels’ candidates. They are pro-war, pro-immigration, pro-gender candidates who want to serve Brussels’ will and Brussels’ interests — they are not right-wing.
not need words..

The Tisza Party has been working for a year and a half to ensure that no EU funds arrive in Hungary. They say that the worse things are for Hungarians, the better it is for them. Outrageous!

What a last, cynical bunch this Tisza is. There are enormous EU funds available for railway development. They put forward their North Pest candidate to talk about what railway development would look like if EU money were to come, while at the same time they themselves have been working in Brussels for a year and a half to make sure Hungary doesn’t receive a single euro cent—because they claim that the worse things are for Hungarians, the better it is for Tisza.

Tisza claims it would bring these funds home. First of all, they should be ashamed of themselves. Second, everyone should remember this well: if Tisza were to come to power, it would mean that the last obstacle to Ukraine joining the European Union would be removed. Because right now, the Orbán government is that obstacle. And if Ukraine joins, then all EU money will go to Ukraine. No money will come here to Hungary. There will be no funds for railway development, or for anything else.

1️⃣ Unsubstantiated attribution of intent (“they are working to make things worse”)

“For a year and a half they have been working to ensure that no EU funds reach Hungary.”
“The worse it is for Hungarians, the better it is for them.”

🔴 Problem:

This is not a factual claim, but a moral accusation.

There is no:

• specific vote,
• document,
• decision,
• date,
• quotation.

👉 Classic propaganda technique:
morally demonizing a political opponent instead of engaging with them in debate.

---

2️⃣ Double talk: “there is money – but they are blocking it”

“There are plenty of resources available for railway development.”
“If EU funds were to arrive…”

🔴 Logical contradiction:

If “plenty of resources are available,” then:

• where are they?
• why aren’t they arriving?

If they are not arriving, then:

• who is blocking them?
• through which legal mechanism?

👉 The speech provides no answers—only emotional fog.

---

3️⃣ Role-reversal trick: the government presents itself as the victim

“while they are working in Brussels to make sure not a single euro cent comes”

🔴 Reality:

The withholding of EU funds is linked to:

• rule-of-law conditions,
• corruption concerns,
• institutional compliance requirements.

These are handled not by opposition parties, but by the mechanisms of:

• the European Commission,
• the European Council,
• the European Parliament.

👉 The speech shifts responsibility:

“we didn’t fail → they are harming you”

---

4️⃣ “They should be ashamed” – humiliation instead of argument

“First of all, they should be ashamed of themselves.”

🔴 This is not a political argument, but:

• moral condemnation,
• a gesture of superiority,
• emotional aggression.

👉 Its function:

• to shut down thinking,
• to enforce loyalty,
• to provoke anger.

---

5️⃣ The grand fear construction: Ukraine as a money-draining bogeyman

“If Tisza came to power… Ukraine would join.”
“All EU money would go to Ukraine.”
“No money would come to Hungary.”

🔴 This part is especially extreme, because:

❌ Ukraine is not a member state; accession requires:

• many years,
• unanimous member-state decisions,
• chapter-by-chapter negotiations.

❌ “All money goes to Ukraine”:

• no such mechanism exists,
• this is not how the EU budget works.

👉 This is an apocalyptic vision, not reality.

---

6️⃣ False causal chain (“if they come → catastrophe follows”)

The logic of the speech:

Tisza comes →
Orbán as an obstacle disappears →
Ukraine joins →
all money disappears →
Hungary collapses

🔴 This is a classic fear domino, where:

• every “→” is an assumption,
• not a single step is proven.

---

🧠 Overall picture: what is this, communication-wise?

This text:

❌ does not inform
❌ does not debate
❌ does not prove

✔️ instead it:

• manufactures enemies,
• plays on emotions,
• paints an external threat,
• demonizes internal opponents,
• and absolves the government of all responsibility.

👉 This is pure mobilizing propaganda, not political analysis.

---

🎯 What can be concluded?

1️⃣ Government communication no longer explains—it intimidates.
2️⃣ Real EU disputes are replaced with simplified fear narratives.
3️⃣ Voters are treated not as partners, but as emotionally manageable subjects.

Hungary has been fined because, according to Brussels, its anti-drug policy is too strict. Bravo!

I skimmed through the latest news, and there’s a small but telling detail about what this “Brussels path” really looks like. The European Court has fined Hungary because, in their view, the Hungarian government’s anti-drug policy is too strict and therefore unlawfully deviates from the common EU drug policy.

This is something we will also be deciding on in April.

No one can sink to their level anymore — and no one wants to.

Brussels is killing Hungary’s utility cost reduction, and the Tisza Party stays silent!

Now this is when silence and refusal to speak say more than anything else. More than a day has passed since Ursula von der Leyen announced the end of purchasing Russian energy, banning it for all member states. And the leaders of the Tisza Party, along with their parliamentary candidates—such as Anna Müller here in Budapest’s 15th district—don’t even dare to utter a single word on this issue.

They don’t dare to contradict Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber, or their other Brussels bosses on anything.

They are dangerous.

🎭 What is really happening in this statement?

1️⃣ “Shut up!” – the level of address

This word is not a political claim, but a humiliating command.

• it does not refute an argument
• it does not debate a position
• it linguistically forces silence

👉 From the perspective of human dignity:
It creates a hierarchy of domination (“you shut up”), which is incompatible with democratic public discourse.

2️⃣ Silence = guilt

The logic is constructed like this:

doesn’t speak → is afraid → is obedient → is dangerous

🔴 The problem:

• silence is not an action
• yet it becomes a moral and existential judgment

👉 This is classic collective suspicion, without evidence.

3️⃣ Personalization as intimidation

Dropping specific names:

• Tisza Party
• “here in the 15th district, Anna Müller”

This does not inform; instead it:

• draws a target
• creates fear even at the local level

👉 Message: “We know who you are. We are watching.”

4️⃣ “Brussels bosses” – a narrative of subordination

The list:

• Ursula von der Leyen
• Manfred Weber

is not a statement of fact, but a construction of hierarchy:

they give orders → these people obey

👉 As a result, the addressed individuals lose their independent moral status.

5️⃣ “Life-threatening” – but to whom?

This is the most serious element.

• no concrete action
• no causal chain
• no evidence

Yet it is presented as an existential threat.

👉 This is already a dehumanizing label:
not a debate partner, but a “danger.”

🧠 What can be concluded from this?

✔️ The speaker’s attitude

Someone who speaks like this is not trying to persuade,
but to silence
and to morally exclude.

This is not strength, but a desire for control.

✔️ From the perspective of human dignity

The opponent is no longer a person, but an “instrument” or a “threat.”
Language is not used for communication, but for dominance.

👉 If they speak like this here, they will not speak differently elsewhere.

🧩 Summed up in one sentence

This statement is not about utility prices, but about
who has the right to speak — and who does not.

According to expectations in the Ukrainian press, Hungary would immediately enter the war after a change of government. Unfortunately, they are right!!

I read that Hungary would provide combat aircraft to Ukraine. What is this supposed to mean? Yes, the Ukrainian press writes this, and the Hungarian press picked it up from there. But how does that even make sense?

There is a dispute in the Czech Republic. The Czech president is pro-war and promised Zelenskyy that he would sell him combat aircraft, but the new government—the Babiš government—blocked this. Because of this, the Ukrainian press is writing that unfortunately the Prague deal did not go through, but how great it would be that there will be a change of government in Hungary in April.

A new government would come, a pro-war, Ukraine-friendly government, and then combat aircraft could come from Hungary.

This is what must be prevented.

1️⃣ “According to the Ukrainian press” – shifting responsibility

“According to expectations in the Ukrainian press…”

This is not evidence, but a shield of external attribution.

✔️ There is no:

• specific article
• date
• headline
• quotation

👉 Function:
“Not me saying it, they are” – allowing the speaker to evade accountability.

---

2️⃣ Rumor → “Unfortunately, they are right!!”

“Unfortunately, they are right!!”

This is one of the most important tricks.

🔴 It skips the burden of proof.
A speculation is turned into a fact purely through emphasis and emotion.

👉 This is not analysis, but emotional closure:

“Don’t ask any further questions, we’ve already decided for you.”

---

3️⃣ Czech story → Hungarian war (logical fallacy)

The narrative chain:

• There is a dispute in the Czech Republic
• Miloš Zeman is pro-war (claim)
• Andrej Babiš blocked the deal

❗ From this, the conclusion is drawn that Hungary would enter a war.

👉 This is a classic logical error:
a domestic political conflict in another country is used to manufacture a Hungarian future scenario.

---

4️⃣ “There will be a change of government in April” – pre-fabricated panic

“…how great it is that there will be a change of government in Hungary in April.”

At this point, it is no longer a prediction, but scare tactics.

🧠 What does it do?

• It frames the election not as a political choice,
• but as a wartime risk.

👉 This is emotional blackmail:

“If you vote differently, there will be blood on your hands.”

---

5️⃣ “This must be prevented” – fear → command

This is the final step.

• no debate
• no alternatives
• no nuance

❌ Only one message remains:

“Be afraid – and obey.”

---

🎯 Summary

This statement does not inform. Instead, it:

• sells rumors as facts
• cites foreign media without evidence
• uses another country’s story to instill fear
• distorts an election into a wartime decision

This is fear management, not politics.