Thanks — Donald Trump blocked the utility price hike planned by Brussels and the Tisza Party, and with the successful U.S.–Hungarian summit you managed to push Fidesz’s lead over Tisza to 10 percent in the opinion polls. It’s 50–40 in favor of Fidesz — details in the comments.
“No, this really can’t be believed anymore.
Another Tisza Party candidate has surfaced whose Facebook bio was changed at dawn. So it used to say something like, ‘All my life I’ve dreamed of revitalizing the area around Mátészalka,’ that got crossed out, and suddenly it became, ‘All my life I’ve been waiting to revitalize the area around Körmend,’ and now they’re running this candidate in Vas County.
It’s unserious, amateurish, and embarrassing — just like their boss.
They’re a Brussels puppet, and these people are merely the local puppets of Brussels puppets, just waiting to carry out orders from Brussels.
We won’t allow it.”
“They changed the Facebook bio at dawn.”
What is actually happening?
A technical detail is being framed as a “revelation.”
What is not shown:
👉 Suggestion replaces proof:
if it happened “at night” → it must be secret → therefore suspicious → therefore a lie.
This is a classic insinuative argument.
“Mátészalka… Körmend… Vas County”
Rhetorical trick:
A perfectly legal and politically common practice
(running in a different constituency)
is framed as identity fraud.
👉 The unspoken message:
“Doesn’t belong here → not one of us → not authentic.”
This is a weaponized local identity, not a political argument.
“Unserious, amateurish, embarrassing”
This is:
This is labeling.
👉 The goal is not thinking, but triggering an emotional reflex:
shame – contempt – rejection.
“Like their boss”
Key point:
He speaks about the candidates,
then suddenly shifts into an attack based on personal loyalty.
👉 The message:
“They aren’t independent individuals, just parts of a flawed system.”
This is collective delegitimization.
“Brussels puppet… local puppets… carrying out orders”
This is the ideological climax of the speech.
Why is it such a powerful weapon?
👉 What the “puppet” narrative means:
This is political dehumanization, in a refined form.
This is not information — it is a mobilizing command.
👉 The function of the speech:
This statement:
❌ does not refute,
❌ does not analyze,
❌ does not prove,
but instead:
✅ creates suspicion,
✅ makes opponents look ridiculous,
✅ attacks identity,
✅ demands loyalty.
This is not political debate — it is propaganda technique.
He says that he would have already presented his 106 individual parliamentary candidates, but he was waiting for the governing parties to present theirs first. Now he says he won’t wait any longer, so supposedly we just have to wait a little bit more and then he’ll present his own — or something like that.
He’s lying, rambling, and deflecting. He has no one. Not a single credible person is willing to stand with him, and those who were there just signed the so-called anti-war petition, and that’s it.
1️⃣ Discrediting without evidence
“He’s lying, rambling, deflecting — he has no one.”
This is an assertion, not an argument.
– No data
– No names
– No verifiable facts
👉 The goal is not refutation, but pre-emptive erosion of trust.
2️⃣ Time-framing as deliberate vagueness
“You only have to wait a little longer and he’ll present them… or whatever.”
This is a technique of sarcastic relativization:
– it does not deny that a candidate list will exist
– it merely implies that it never will
👉 It plants uncertainty and ridicule in the audience.
3️⃣ Isolation narrative
“Not a single credible person will even talk to him.”
This withdraws social legitimacy:
– it does not attack the program
– it does not attack the candidates
– it creates the impression that “everyone has turned away”
👉 Classic psychological pressure: “Don’t stand with him, or you’ll be alone.”
4️⃣ Labeling an entire group by a single act
“And whoever was there signed the anti-war petition — that’s it.”
This is reductive framing:
– an entire political community is reduced to one gesture
– diversity, motivations, and context are erased
👉 This is how a political camp is turned into a caricature.
🎯 What does this speech actually do?
It does not inform — it launches a pre-emptive attack:
– it anticipates the candidate announcement
– undermines its credibility in advance
– builds an emotional reflex (“this will be fake anyway”)
This is especially typical when the other side does not respond to provocation and refuses to engage in personal attacks.
🧠 Meta-level observation
In Németh Balázs’s case, this style is not spontaneous emotion but role performance:
– provocation
– mockery
– personal attacks
– “inside jokes” for the in-group
The goal is not to persuade the opponent, but to activate and energize one’s own audience.
https://index.hu/gazdasag/2017/05/30/szetlopott_budai_var_szetlopott_varkert_bazar
👉 Kirakatérv: egy látványos felújítást politikai teljesítménnyé emelni, miközben
“I’ve just come from the Fidesz parliamentary group’s Christmas reception, because a lot of people were asking: well then, Balázs, who’s running against you, who’s the Brussels candidate there in North Pest?
So I say, I actually have a piece of paper right here. I’ve been chasing this person for the third week now, but they can’t be found, they don’t talk to voters. Of course they don’t. They don’t want to talk about the left-wing austerity package.
So that’s how it is.”
What is actually happening?
The opponent:
👉 This is a frustrating situation for a political actor
who feeds on reactions.
The problem here is not political, but communicational:
👉 If there is no reaction, there is no show.
When there is no debate, no response, no scandal:
➡️ one has to be manufactured.
👉 The document is not content, but a pretext.
The goal is not to prove anything,
but to make himself appear active
while the other party looks passive.
Because it creates the following equation:
👉 Even if there is nothing behind it.
This is a classic propaganda setup:
Németh Balázs attacks with a non-existent document because he cannot force his opponent into a debate—and without a reaction, he cannot sustain his own role.
Bayer Zsolt
– Recipient of the Knight’s Cross of the Hungarian Order of Merit
– One of the founding members of Fidesz
– A close confidant of Prime Minister Orbán Viktor
The statements are consistently delivered in an indefensible tone: personal attacks, mockery, insults, and obscene phrasing. Argumentation is replaced by emotion-driven tirades. The speakers are visibly comfortable in this environment—the exaggerated language is not a flaw, but an identity.
There is no correction, no fact-checking, no accountability. Criticism is deflected as hostile attack, reinforcing a closed echo chamber.
The program does not aim to persuade, but to bind and inflame. For its audience, this tone feels familiar because it provides identity: “this is how we speak.” Loudness functions as a loyalty test.
The degradation and brutalization of public discourse: arguments disappear, only emotion remains. The “level” at which the speakers feel comfortable is deliberately kept low, because mobilization works best there.
This is not debate and not information—it is performed outrage.
The style is not incidental; it is the message itself.
András Fekete-Győr sent me a message. The Hour of Truth was on, my phone vibrated, and I saw that I had received a message. I’m only responding because the guy has been stuck in my craw for a very long time—ever since he torpedoed the Budapest Olympics. And that is despite the fact that with the World Athletics Championships, and with the international sporting events held in Budapest and across Hungary both before and after that, we proved that Budapest would be a perfect host for an Olympic Games. But people like these—foreign-funded lunatics—took that opportunity away from us, at least for a while.
So Fekete-Győr sent me a message. Very briefly, he told me that I have no place in public life. This coming from someone who campaigned for Romanian and Slovak politicians and parties against Hungarian candidates in neighboring countries. People like that never had a place in Hungarian public life—and never should have.
And this is the same person who for three and a half years has been constantly inciting tensions and wants to drag Hungary into the war, who would send Hungarian young people off as soldiers, and would send weapons, manpower, and money to Ukraine. Fortunately, Hungarian voters have already taken care of this.
Momentum was—Momentum is no more. And people like Fekete-Győr will not be able to claw their way back into power even on the back of a Brussels puppet government, because next April Hungarian voters will not deal them any cards.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/684956391336110Actors:
– Németh Balázs
– András Fekete-Győr
It suggests that
👉 András Fekete-Győr is “paid from abroad,”
👉 he took away Hungary’s chance to host the Olympics,
👉 he would drag the country into war,
👉 and therefore “has no place in Hungarian public life.”
This narrative is presented within a morally exclusionary, “nation-defending” frame.
1️⃣ Personal grievance disguised as political morality
“I’ve had it in for this guy for a very long time.”
👉 This is not a public-interest argument but personal resentment, later wrapped in ideological packaging.
2️⃣ Scapegoating over the Olympics
“He torpedoed the Budapest Olympics.”
👉 The decision was a multi-actor, complex political-economic process, yet responsibility is shifted onto a single person.
👉 Classic propaganda: one face = one loss.
3️⃣ The “foreign-funded lunatic” label
👉 No evidence
👉 Automatic delegitimization
👉 No engagement with the position—only stigmatization
This is enemy construction, not argument.
4️⃣ Exclusion from the nation
“People like this had no place and would not have had a place in Hungarian public life.”
👉 This is no longer political criticism but
👉 an authoritarian logic: whoever thinks differently is not part of the nation.
5️⃣ War-mongering distortion
“For three and a half years he has been constantly inciting and wants to take Hungary into war.”
👉 Political stance = “war agitation”
👉 Diplomatic/alliance debate = “sending troops”
This is deliberate concept-blurring, optimized for fear-mongering.
6️⃣ Election ‘prediction’ as a threat
“Momentum was, Momentum is no more.”
“They won’t be dealt any cards.”
👉 Not analysis but a victory ritual
👉 Conditions the audience toward loyalty, not thinking.
This statement is not a debate but:
👉 It speaks the language of “cleansing” public life while eliminating the very possibility of debate.