Zelensky and virtually every Ukrainian politician, military officer, and analyst are saying they are rooting for Tisza.

Ruszin-Szendi shouts “Slava Ukraini.”

Tisza’s MEPs applaud in Brussels wearing T-shirts with Ukrainian flags.

Péter Magyar had his own supporters vote in favor of Ukraine’s EU accession.

István Kapitány, giving in to Ukrainian blackmail, would cut Hungary off from cheap Russian energy.

A Ukrainian flag appeared at Tisza’s pro-war march.

At City Hall in the capital, led by Gergely Karácsony and the Tisza Party, the Ukrainian flag is still hanging even after the death threats made by Ukrainians against the Prime Minister’s family.

Does anyone still have any doubts left?

Brussels and Zelensky have joined forces with Péter Magyar to bring down the national government and install a pro-Ukraine government so that Hungarians, too, would finance the war, finance Ukraine, and give up cheap Russian energy.

That would push fuel prices above 1,000 forints and make us pay 3 to 4 times more for utilities.

Hungarians want no part of this. We showed that at the Peace March as well, and everyone knows: on April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.

1️⃣ “Everyone supports them” narrative

(bandwagon + authority framing)

Excerpt:
“Zelensky and all Ukrainian politicians… support Tisza”

Technique:
➡️ Total generalization (“all”)
➡️ Presents external actors as a unified voice
➡️ Appeal to authority (politicians, military figures)

Goal:
➡️ Frame Tisza as “backed by foreign actors”
➡️ Create suspicion

Effect:
➡️ “They do not represent Hungarian interests”

⚠️ What is omitted / distorted:

• No evidence that “everyone” says this
• Individual statements are generalized
• Analysts’ opinions ≠ official positions

---

2️⃣ Symbolic guilt (flag = loyalty)

(guilt by association)

Examples:

• “Ukrainian flag T-shirts”
• “a Ukrainian flag appeared”
• “the Ukrainian flag is displayed”

Technique:
➡️ A visual symbol = political loyalty
➡️ Context is removed

Goal:
➡️ Trigger emotional reaction
➡️ Suggest “they serve Ukraine”

Effect:
➡️ Automatic association in the reader’s mind

⚠️ What is omitted:

• A flag can represent solidarity (not political subordination)
• No context: who, why, under what circumstances

---

3️⃣ Quote mining + reframing

(quote mining / reframing)

Excerpt:
“Slava Ukraini”
“he had his voters support Ukraine’s EU accession”

Technique:
➡️ Short statements are highlighted
➡️ Given new meaning without context

Goal:
➡️ Strengthen the “betrayal” narrative

Effect:
➡️ Simplified image: “they stand with Ukraine”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• What exactly did the statement mean?
• In what situation was it said?
• Was it a poll or an actual policy decision?

---

4️⃣ Forced causal chain

(false cause / domino effect)

Excerpt:
“pro-Ukraine government → we fund the war → expensive energy → 1000 HUF fuel”

Technique:
➡️ Multi-step chain without evidence
➡️ Assumptions stacked together

Goal:
➡️ Create fear through economic consequences

Effect:
➡️ “if they come → financial disaster”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• No proof these outcomes are inevitable
• Energy prices are driven by global factors
• EU accession ≠ automatic cost increase

---

5️⃣ External conspiracy narrative

(conspiracy framing)

Excerpt:
“Brussels and Zelensky teamed up with Péter Magyar”

Technique:
➡️ Linking multiple actors without evidence
➡️ Suggesting hidden coordination

Goal:
➡️ Fully delegitimize the opponent
➡️ Portray them as “not independent”

Effect:
➡️ Distrust, enemy image

⚠️ What is omitted:

• No concrete evidence
• Diplomatic relations ≠ conspiracy

---

6️⃣ Fear + wallet manipulation

(fear appeal + economic anxiety)

Excerpt:
“fuel would be over 1000 HUF”
“utility costs would be 3–4 times higher”

Technique:
➡️ Specific numbers (illusion of credibility)
➡️ Extreme scenarios

Goal:
➡️ Trigger personal fear

Effect:
➡️ Immediate rejection (“I don’t want this”)

⚠️ What is omitted:

• Not substantiated
• Market prices are not determined by a single political decision

---

7️⃣ “The people have already decided” narrative

(bandwagon + legitimacy)

Excerpt:
“Hungarians don’t want this… we showed it at the Peace March”

Technique:
➡️ One event = opinion of the entire society
➡️ Crowd = truth

Goal:
➡️ Build legitimacy

Effect:
➡️ “if you disagree → you are the minority”

⚠️ What is omitted:

• One event ≠ representative sample
• Election ≠ demonstration

---

🧠 Overall picture (what is actually happening)

The text follows a classic propaganda structure:

👉 pattern:

external enemy + internal traitor + economic fear + moral framing

---

⚠️ The key manipulation

👉 what you correctly noticed:

✔️ Omission of context + reframing

This is how it works:

• select a single element
  (flag, statement, event)
• remove it from its context
• assign a new meaning
  → “this proves that…”
• build a larger narrative on top of it

---

🎯 In short

This text:

• does not prove → it connects
• does not analyze → it suggests
• does not show the full picture → it selects and distorts

Today, the Government of Hungary is the government of the Hungarian people. We are working to ensure that this remains the case after April as well—that it is not Zelensky or Brussels who forms the government, but the Hungarian people.

That is why: Fidesz and Viktor Orbán are the safe choice!

I do not want to tell you that the current government is flawless—I would gladly say so, but we all know that is not the case. Those who work also make mistakes. However, I can say with certainty that Hungary has a government that stands with you, only with you, and wholeheartedly stands for Hungary. We have a government that is capable of protecting Hungary and safeguarding the achievements of recent years.

1️⃣ “Government of the people” narrative

(people’s government framing / populist legitimacy)

Excerpt:
“Today, Hungary’s government is the government of the Hungarian people.”

Technique:
➡️ Directly equates the government with “the people”
➡️ Eliminates the distinction between the state and a political force

Goal:

• strengthen legitimacy
• create the frame: “whoever opposes them → opposes the people”

Effect:
➡️ The reader may feel:
supporting the government = a patriotic duty

👉 Real issue:
a government ≠ the entire society

---

2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt:
“so that neither Zelensky nor Brussels forms the government”

Technique:
➡️ Brings foreign actors (Zelensky, Brussels) into a domestic political decision
➡️ Suggests a false image as if they could “form a government”

Goal:

• generate fear
• strengthen the sovereignty-protection narrative
• dramatize the stakes of the election

Effect:
➡️ “if you don’t vote for them → foreigners will rule”

👉 Real issue:
foreign actors do not form the Hungarian government

---

3️⃣ False dilemma (reducing to two choices)

(false dichotomy)

Excerpt:
“not … but the Hungarian people”
“Fidesz … the safe choice”

Technique:
➡️ Reduces reality to two options:

• Fidesz = Hungarian people
• everything else = foreign interests

Goal:

• eliminate alternatives
• trap undecided voters

Effect:
➡️ The reader may feel:
there is no real choice

---

4️⃣ “Safe choice” framing

(certainty framing / risk aversion manipulation)

Excerpt:
“the safe choice”

Technique:
➡️ Creates a safety vs. risk dichotomy
➡️ Frames change as dangerous

Goal:

• protect the status quo
• appeal to risk-averse voters

Effect:
➡️ “better the known than the unknown” mindset

---

5️⃣ Apparent self-criticism

(strategic concession / inoculation)

Excerpt:
“not perfect… those who work also make mistakes”

Technique:
➡️ Admits minor flaws intentionally
➡️ Increases perceived credibility

Goal:

• soften criticism
• build trust

Effect:
➡️ “sounds honest → makes everything else more believable”

👉 Trick:
no concrete mistakes are actually named

---

6️⃣ Emotional alignment and loyalty

(emotional alignment / loyalty framing)

Excerpt:
“standing with you and only with you”
“with all its heart for Hungary”

Technique:
➡️ Builds emotional rather than rational connection
➡️ Creates a moral bond

Goal:

• foster loyalty
• suppress critical thinking

Effect:
➡️ “they are with us → therefore we must support them”

---

7️⃣ Protection narrative

(protection narrative / fear appeal)

Excerpt:
“able to protect Hungary”
“protect the achievements of recent years”

Technique:
➡️ Combines threat + protection
➡️ Implies danger: someone could take these achievements away

Goal:

• generate fear
• raise the stakes of the election

Effect:
➡️ “if not them → everything is at risk”

---

🧠 Overall picture (briefly)

The text is a classic populist + defensive propaganda mix:

Key elements:

• “we are the people”
• “external enemies are threatening”
• “only we can protect you”
• “there is no real alternative”

Core logic:

👉 Fidesz = security + nation + protection
👉 opposition = foreign influence + risk + uncertainty

---

🎯 Main manipulation

➡️ **The election is framed not as a political choice,
but as an existential act of defense.

Without Budapest, there is no great victory. The nation’s capital showed at the Peace March that the “March youth” can look down on us with pride.

This patriotic spirit suits the city very well, and it would be even better if this mindset dominated affairs in the capital—because in my opinion, things would run better here too. By the way, how do you see it in Budapest—how strong are we, how determined are we?

I think that anyone who is right-wing in Budapest—which is a difficult city for the right—works twice as hard and is twice as determined. And let’s not forget that without the patriotic national forces of Budapest, there would never have been a two-thirds victory in the previous elections.

So now as well, every patriotic right-wing Budapest resident who wants to raise their voice against Ukrainian pressure is greatly needed on April 12—needed more than ever.

🔎 Rhetorical / Propaganda Analysis

1️⃣ Bandwagon Effect / Mass Legitimacy

Excerpt:
“Without Budapest there is no great victory”
“It was demonstrated at the Peace March”

Technique:
➡️ Uses the Peace March as proof that “the nation stands behind them”
➡️ Generalizes broad social support from a single event

Goal:

• Strengthen the legitimacy of their own side
• Create the feeling that “we are the majority”

Effect:
➡️ The audience may feel:
if many people support it → then it must be right

👉 Real issue:

• an event ≠ election result
• participation ≠ representative social support

---

2️⃣ False Cause / Oversimplification

Excerpt:
“Without the patriotic forces of Budapest, there would have been no two-thirds majority”

Technique:
➡️ Reduces a complex election outcome to a single factor

Goal:

• Exaggerate Budapest’s role
• Mobilize their own voter base

Effect:
➡️ The audience may believe:
their own participation was a decisive historical factor

👉 Reality:

• a two-thirds majority = a complex system of national lists + individual districts
• Budapest is traditionally not the strongest base of the right

---

3️⃣ Identity Framing / In-group Pride

Excerpt:
“Anyone who is right-wing in Budapest is twice as determined”

Technique:
➡️ “Elite minority” narrative
➡️ Suggests moral superiority

Goal:

• Strengthen group identity
• Increase loyalty

Effect:
➡️ Supporters feel:
“we are special”

---

4️⃣ Symbolic Nationalism / Emotional Framing

Excerpt:
“The March youth can proudly look down on us”

Technique:
➡️ Connects current politics to historical heroes

Goal:

• Elevate the political side to a moral high ground

Effect:
➡️ Political choice becomes a patriotic duty

---

5️⃣ External Enemy Framing

Excerpt:
“Ukrainian blackmail”

Technique:
➡️ Introduces an external enemy into the narrative

Goal:

• Create fear
• Simplify politics into “us vs them”

Effect:
➡️ If you’re not with them → you’re with external forces

---

📊 6️⃣ THE CORE: Manipulation with “numbers”

Claim:

➡️ “Tisza was beaten in numbers → this is a fact”

What the text actually does:

➡️ DOES NOT provide any real numbers
➡️ Only creates an impression

---

🔧 Techniques:

❌ 1. Implicit suggestion of numbers

• “it showed”
• “great victory”
• “we need everyone”

➡️ replaces data with emotion

---

❌ 2. Event ≠ measurement

• A march is not statistical evidence
• No:
  • sampling
  • ratios
  • comparison

---

❌ 3. Ignoring the opposition

➡️ No mention of:

• other events
• comparative data

---

❌ 4. Declaring something a “fact” without proof

➡️ Classic propaganda:
claim → no evidence → presented as fact

---

🧠 Short summary (raw, as requested)

👉 This is not a data-based claim, but:

• emotional framing
• identity building
• mass illusion

👉 Statements like
“Tisza was beaten in numbers”
are not proven facts → but political narratives

👉 Real measurement would be:

• election results
• opinion polls
• participation comparisons

---

⚡ One sentence version:

This text doesn’t use data—it manufactures a sense of mass support and sells it as a “fact.”

Péter Magyar was exposed at his own march by the Soros-backed, Hungary-hating Brussels MEP. Among several large Ukrainian flags, Daniel Freund openly stated that the leader of the left stands fully behind Zelensky.

“He would allow the financing of Ukraine and its military support, and I think we need to get rid of fossil energy, especially if it is Russian energy.”

So, according to the statements of his own allies, the leader of the left would financially support Ukraine and send weapons into the war, while immediately scrapping the cheap energy that protects Hungarian families.

That is why Brussels sends its people here, and that is why their blue-and-yellow flags are present. Because they know perfectly well that Péter Magyar would not be able to say no to their expectations: he would drag Hungary into the war, send Hungarian taxpayers’ money to Ukraine, and phase out cheap Russian energy.

As long as Hungary has a national government, we will stay out of the war, we will not send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine, and we will not pay more for energy. That is why Fidesz is the safe choice.

Daniel Freund, one of George Soros’s favorite politicians, exposed Péter Magyar and his allies. Speaking as a participant at Péter Magyar’s march, he said that if Péter Magyar were in government, support would go to Ukraine, our money would also start flowing to Ukraine, and Hungary should break away from cheap Russian energy.

No matter how much Péter Magyar and his allies deny it, no matter how much they deny the Ukrainian flags at their march, and no matter how much they claim they would not do this, we know exactly that the Ukrainian flag is already flying at City Hall, and that they sat in the European Parliament wearing Ukrainian shirts. All of this proves that they would be a pro-Ukraine government.

We will not allow this. That is also why so many of us attended the Peace March. There we showed that we cannot be blackmailed. We know what Hungary’s interests are — and that is why on April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.

Rhetorical / Propaganda Analysis

1️⃣ Construction of an Enemy Image

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt

“a Sorosist, Hungary-hating Brussels representative”
“Brussels sends its people here”
“stands with Zelensky”

Technique

The text connects several external actors into a single threatening bloc:

• Brussels
• George Soros
• Ukraine
• Zelensky

This is a classic political narrative:

➡️ external forces + internal political actors working together against the country.

Goal

• to weaken the legitimacy of the opponent
• to frame the political debate as a matter of “national defense”

Effect

The reader may easily feel that:

➡️ anyone who supports the opposition → serves foreign interests.

---

2️⃣ Internal Traitor Narrative

(traitor framing / internal enemy)

Excerpt

“Magyar Péter was exposed at his own march…”
“the leader of the left stands with Zelensky in everything”

Technique

The opposition politician is not presented simply as a political rival, but as:

➡️ someone serving foreign interests.

This rhetoric frames the political conflict as loyalty vs. betrayal.

Goal

• moral delegitimization
• portraying the opponent as unpatriotic

Effect

For the reader, the opposition becomes:

➡️ not an alternative
➡️ but a threat.

---

3️⃣ Fear-Based Scenario

(fear appeal / catastrophic framing)

Excerpt

“he would drag Hungary into the war”
“he would send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine”
“he would phase out cheap Russian energy”

Technique

The text chains together several negative consequences:

• war
• financial losses
• expensive energy

This is worst-case scenario rhetoric.

Goal

• mobilizing fear
• turning the electoral decision into an existential issue

Effect

The reader may feel that:

➡️ if the opposition wins → serious losses will follow.

---

4️⃣ Energy Security Narrative

(economic security framing)

Excerpt

“he would phase out cheap Russian energy”
“cheap utility prices protecting Hungarian families”

Technique

The political debate is linked to household costs.

Key elements:

• utility bills
• energy prices
• protection of families

Goal

to transform a geopolitical debate into an everyday cost-of-living issue.

Effect

The reader may conclude that:

➡️ opposition policy = higher utility costs.

---

5️⃣ Symbols Used as Evidence

(symbolic evidence framing)

Excerpt

“Ukrainian flags at their march”
“they sat in the European Parliament wearing Ukrainian T-shirts”

Technique

Symbols are presented as political evidence:

• flags
• clothing
• demonstration imagery

This is the rhetoric of visual proof.

Goal

a simple and easily understandable message:

➡️ “look at the images → the proof is there.”

Effect

Instead of complex political arguments,

➡️ visual associations dominate the interpretation.

---

6️⃣ “We Protect the Country” Narrative

(protector narrative / leadership framing)

Excerpt

“As long as Hungary has a national government…”
“we will stay out of the war”

Technique

The government is portrayed as a protective force:

• guarantor of peace
• defender of energy prices
• protector of national interests.

Goal

to frame the election as a security issue:

➡️ stability vs. risk.

Effect

The message suggests that:

➡️ the current government = security.

---

7️⃣ Campaign Mobilization

(electoral mobilization framing)

Excerpt

“that is why Fidesz is the safe choice”
“on April 12”

Technique

The entire narrative culminates in an electoral call.

This follows a classic campaign closing structure:

1. presenting the danger
2. identifying those responsible
3. offering the solution

➡️ “vote for us”.

Goal

political mobilization.

Effect

For the reader, the election appears as:

➡️ a strategic decision.

---

💡 Summary

The text follows a typical campaign rhetoric structure:

• external enemy (Brussels, Ukraine, Soros)
• internal actor as collaborator (Magyar Péter)
• fear-based consequences (war, expensive energy)
• government as protector
• electoral mobilization.

This creates an election narrative framed as a national security issue.

The notorious Zoltán Tarr has now blurted out to Brussels’ newspaper, Politico, that a group is currently preparing a plan for them to sabotage MOL and get rid of its leadership.

Yes, you heard that right. Classic communist tactics.

❗ And of course, once again it’s about MOL. Do we remember what happened to MOL the last time we were not in government?

Gyurcsány sold it to the Austrians, and then the Orbán government had to buy it back.

The fact that MOL is in Hungarian ownership and has been able to expand over the past decade is an enormous treasure for every Hungarian.

👉 And a huge curse for every foreign oil giant, like Shell.

That is why Zoltán Tarr wants to dismantle MOL. That is why “Captain Shell” and Péter Magyar want to phase out cheap Russian energy.

They are nothing but lobbyists for foreign companies. They don’t care how or for how much you heat your home or fill up your tank.

They want to make the largest Hungarian company impossible to operate, to bleed it dry, so that Shell can rake in hundreds of billions.

🟠 This cannot be undone four years later.

Use your head, protect your wallet — vote Fidesz!

On April 12, Viktor Orbán is the safe choice.

1️⃣ Construction of an Enemy Image

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt

“Tarr Zoltán would destroy MOL.”
“Shell captain and Péter Magyar.”
“foreign oil giants.”

Technique

The speech connects several actors into a single narrative of enemies:

• opposition politician (Tarr Zoltán)
• opposition leader (Péter Magyar)
• foreign corporation (Shell)
• “Brussels”

This follows a classic propaganda pattern:

➡️ external interests + internal traitors

Goal

• delegitimize the political opponent
• suggest that they do not represent Hungarian interests

Effect

The audience may easily feel that:

➡️ supporting the opposition = supporting foreign interests.

---

2️⃣ National Wealth Protection Narrative

(ownership protection narrative)

Excerpt

“MOL is in Hungarian ownership.”
“This is an enormous treasure for every Hungarian.”

Technique

The political debate is framed as protecting national property.

MOL is presented not simply as a company, but as:

➡️ a national asset.

Goal

• create emotional attachment
• portray government policy as protection

Effect

The audience may feel that:

➡️ supporting the government = protecting Hungarian national wealth.

---

3️⃣ Conspiracy Narrative

(conspiracy framing)

Excerpt

“A plan is being prepared to sabotage MOL.”
“They want to deal with the leadership.”

Technique

The text suggests the existence of a secret plan:

• “a group”
• “a plan”
• “a Brussels newspaper”

This creates a conspiracy frame.

Goal

• generate a sense of threat
• demonize the motives of the political opponent

Effect

The audience may feel that:

➡️ there is organized action being planned against Hungary.

---

4️⃣ Manipulation of Historical Example

(selective historical framing)

Excerpt

“Gyurcsány sold it to the Austrians.”

Technique

A past political conflict is invoked to:

• reinforce the present narrative
• create a parallel between the past and the present

Goal

• warn voters with past mistakes
• place current political opponents in the same category

Effect

➡️ “If the opposition comes to power → the country will be sold again.”

---

5️⃣ Economic Fear Appeal

(economic fear appeal)

Excerpt

“They don’t care how much you pay for heating or fuel.”
“They would make hundreds of billions.”

Technique

The message focuses on everyday costs:

• heating
• fuel
• household expenses

Goal

• turn a political issue into a pocketbook issue

Effect

➡️ victory of the opponent = a more expensive life.

---

6️⃣ Mobilization Slogan

(political call to action)

Excerpt

“Use your head, use your wallet, vote Fidesz!”
“Viktor Orbán is the safe choice!”

Technique

Short, memorable campaign slogans.

Goal

• mobilize voters
• simplify the political message

Effect

➡️ reduces a complex political debate to a simple electoral choice.

---

✅ Summary

The text combines several classic campaign techniques:

• enemy construction
• protection of national assets
• conspiracy narrative
• economic fear appeal
• historical comparison
• electoral mobilization

Overall, it is a strongly emotion-driven campaign message built around the frame of:

➡️ “national protection vs. foreign interests.”

We will never allow anyone to take away what belongs to the Hungarian people.
We will protect our borders, our families, and our independence. We will defend our country from war and from those in Brussels and Kyiv who want to impose their will on us.

On April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice!

Go Fidesz! Go Fidesz! And I also make this clear: no matter what tricks they try, we will never allow them to take from you what is yours and what you are entitled to.

What belongs to the Hungarian people will remain the property of the Hungarian people. Neither international big capital, nor Brussels, nor Ukraine will be allowed to plunder Hungary.

We will protect what we have, we will protect our future, and we will defend everything that all of you have worked for.

1️⃣ Ownership protection narrative
(ownership framing / protection narrative)

Excerpt

“We will never allow them to take away what belongs to Hungarians.”
“What belongs to Hungarians will remain Hungarian.”

Technique

The political message is framed as protecting people’s property and rights.
Government policy is presented as if its main purpose were defending what belongs to Hungarians.

Key elements

• “what belongs to Hungarians”
• “take away”
• “we will protect”

Goal

• to create a moral framework
• to present political decisions as questions of fairness and justice

Effect

The audience may feel that

➡️ supporting the government = protecting their own property and rights.

---

2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt

“agents of Brussels and Kyiv”
“neither Brussels nor Ukraine can pocket Hungary’s wealth”

Technique

The political conflict is projected onto external actors.

These are presented as adversaries:

• Brussels
• Ukraine
• “international big capital”

They are portrayed not as political partners, but as threatening forces.

Goal

• to simplify the conflict
• to reduce political debate to a “us vs. them” narrative

Effect

The message implies that

➡️ anyone who does not support the government may be seen as serving foreign interests.

---

3️⃣ Defender narrative

(defender framing)

Excerpt

“We will protect our borders, our families, and our independence.”

Technique

The political actor is positioned as a protector.

The values highlighted include:

• borders
• families
• independence
• peace

All of these are fundamental security-related values.

Goal

to present the government as the guarantor of security and stability.

Effect

The message may lead voters to feel that

➡️ the political choice is fundamentally a question of security.

---

4️⃣ Fear-based mobilization

(fear appeal)

Excerpt

“We will protect our country from war.”
“Hungary cannot be looted.”

Technique

The speech highlights two primary threats:

• war
• economic exploitation

Goal

• emotional mobilization
• strengthening political support

Effect

Voters may feel that

➡️ a victory by the political opponent could endanger the country.

---

5️⃣ Simplified campaign slogan

(campaign simplification)

Excerpt

“On April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.”

Technique

The political decision is reduced to a simple and memorable sentence.

This is a typical campaign tool:

• short
• repeatable
• easy to remember

Goal

to enable rapid spread of the message.

Effect

Such phrases tend to stick easily in voters’ minds.

---

Summary

The speech’s communication strategy is built around four main elements:

1️⃣ Ownership protection narrative – “what belongs to Hungarians”
2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy – Brussels, Ukraine
3️⃣ Defender role – the government as the guarantor of security
4️⃣ Fear-based mobilization – war and economic threat

This type of rhetoric is typical of campaign communication, using emotional and identity-based framing to mobilize voters.

My prediction came true! 😉
It was the biggest Peace March (Békemenet) ever, and in four weeks a similarly large Fidesz victory can follow! 🧡

We commit that even in such a chaotic world we will preserve Hungary as an island of security and stability.

On March 15, at the largest Peace March of all time, hundreds of thousands stood up for our country and sent a message to Brussels, Kyiv, and the Tisza Party: Hungary does not want war.

Brussels decided to continue the war instead of choosing peace, and now it is preparing for war. The leaders in Brussels first committed themselves to unconditional financial and military support for Ukraine, and now they have even set a target date for Europe’s entry into the war.

In his holiday speech, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán made it clear:

“We must achieve a historic victory, because the next government will bear a historic responsibility.”

The position of the national government is clear:
we will not allow ourselves to be dragged into the war, we will not send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine, and we will not pay more for energy.

This is why Brussels and Kyiv need a government that would carry out all their war-related demands. And they have already found their candidate and ally: the party of Péter Magyar.

Just as on March 15, on April 12 we must again say no to demands that go against Hungarian interests.

“We must renew the anti-war alliance formed at the previous election. We commit that even in such a turbulent world we will preserve Hungary as an island of security and stability,” the Prime Minister declared.

We will stay out of the war, we will not pay Ukraine, and we will not allow a puppet government from Kyiv to be installed over us.

Fidesz is the safe choice.

It will certainly be even bigger than the previous ones — that’s my prediction already. And it is very important, because before every election we can feel how much weight it carries when many of us are there.

But I truly feel that the pressure on Hungary, the external attacks we are facing now, are unprecedented. And because of this, our peaceful and calm response must also be unprecedented — large and strong.

So I really hope that this will be the case today.

Analysis of the Communication and Propaganda Techniques in the Text

1️⃣ Mass legitimacy narrative

(bandwagon effect / mass legitimacy)

Excerpt

“It was the largest Peace March ever.”
“Hundreds of thousands stood up for our country.”

Technique

The political position is justified by the size of the crowd.
The communication suggests:

➡️ if many people support it → then it must be the correct side.

Goal

• strengthen social legitimacy
• influence undecided voters
• create the feeling that “the majority is with us”

Effect

Readers may easily feel that:

➡️ “if so many people support it, then they must be right.”

---

2️⃣ Construction of an external enemy

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt

“Brussels and Kyiv need a government that…”
“external attack against Hungary”

Technique

The conflict is framed around external actors:

• Brussels
• Kyiv
• the opposition

These actors are not presented as political partners in debate, but as threatening forces.

Goal

• present domestic political conflict as an international attack
• frame political opponents as representatives of foreign interests

Effect

The audience may feel that:

➡️ anyone supporting the opposition → supports foreign forces.

---

3️⃣ Fear appeal

(fear appeal)

Excerpt

“Brussels is preparing for war.”
“A target date has already been set for Europe’s entry into the war.”

Technique

The message suggests an imminent danger.

The conflict is framed not as a political debate, but as:

➡️ a war threat.

Goal

• trigger emotional reactions
• amplify the perceived importance of the election

Effect

People may feel that:

➡️ if they choose the wrong option → there will be war.

---

4️⃣ “Us vs. them” framing

(binary framing / polarization)

Excerpt

“We will stay out of the war.”
“They support the war.”

Technique

The political landscape is simplified into two sides:

side	meaning
government	peace
opposition	war

Goal

to simplify the political debate.

Effect

Complex issues disappear, and the choice becomes:

➡️ “peace or war.”

---

5️⃣ Mobilization of national identity

(national identity framing)

Excerpt

“We will preserve Hungary as an island of security and calm.”

Technique

The political position is presented as a national mission.

Key elements

• defending Hungary
• sovereignty
• national interest

Goal

to place political support on an emotional foundation.

Effect

The decision appears not only as a political choice but as:

➡️ a patriotic duty.

---

6️⃣ Delegitimization of the political opponent

(delegitimization framing)

Excerpt

“to install a Kyiv puppet government on our necks”

Technique

The opposition is not presented as a normal political rival, but as:

➡️ a foreign puppet.

Goal

• undermine trust
• discredit the political opponent

Effect

The opposition appears not as an alternative, but as:

➡️ a threat.

---

7️⃣ Electoral mobilization

(mobilization rhetoric)

Excerpt

“On April 12 we must also say no.”

Technique

The speech transforms a mass rally into electoral mobilization.

Goal

• convert participants into voters
• turn the experience of the crowd into political capital

Effect

The event becomes a campaign tool.

---

Overall picture

The communication constructs a classic political narrative:

Structure

1️⃣ large crowd → legitimacy
2️⃣ external enemies → Brussels / Kyiv
3️⃣ internal opponent → “puppet government”
4️⃣ threat → war
5️⃣ solution → the current government

This is a highly mobilizing, emotionally driven political message that uses:

• fear
• identity
• perception of mass support

to strengthen political backing.

❌ We will not go to war with Brussels!
❌ We will not allow Ukraine into the EU!
❌ We will not give up cheap energy!

Hungarian youth will not die for Ukraine — they will live for Hungary!

🟠 Only Fidesz and Viktor Orbán guarantee all of this!

Four weeks from now, on Sunday, Fidesz is the safe choice.

---

The situation is that this bicycle is heading straight toward a cliff. A stick has to be put into the spokes of that bicycle, because we do not want to fall into the abyss together with the whole Brussels madness that is pedaling toward death.

And the truth is that Anita Orbán and her allies are doing exactly that. They want to join that European mass like obedient little scouts — or rather like “little pioneers” (that’s probably the better comparison — apologies to the scouts, I used to be one myself). In other words, they want to take part in something that for the past 16 years we have tried with all our strength to protect Hungary from.

We did not want to go along with the gender ideology,
we did not want to follow the path of pro-migration policies,
we do not want to give up even a small piece of our sovereignty,
and we do not want to give up cheap Russian energy just so that everyone ends up paying much more.

The reality is that the Tisza Party, through many statements and leaked materials, has already admitted that they want to push Hungary back under the Brussels boot.

But we have 16 years of work in freeing Hungary from that.
We can finally breathe free air, stand upright, and say:

“Thank you very much — we will decide for ourselves what is good for Hungary, and we do not ask for others to interfere or tell us what to do.”

1️⃣ Construction of an External Enemy

(external enemy framing / scapegoating)

Excerpt:
“We will not go to war with Brussels!”
“We will not allow Ukraine into the EU!”
“…the whole Brussels madness… cycling toward death…”

Technique:
The text clearly constructs an external enemy:

• Brussels
• Ukraine
• the “European mass”

These actors are not presented as partners or political actors, but as threatening and destructive forces.

Goal:

• to create fear
• to simplify the political debate into a “us vs. them” logic
• to reframe complex issues as external attacks

Effect:
The reader may feel that:

➡️ anyone who does not support Fidesz supports foreign forces
➡️ the country is under siege

---

2️⃣ Fear Appeal and Existential Threat

(fear appeal / existential threat framing)

Excerpt:
“Hungarian young people will not die for Ukraine…”
“…cycling toward death…”
“…falling into the abyss.”

Technique:
The message does not present a simple political disagreement, but elevates the issue to a life-and-death choice.
Words like “die,” “death,” and “abyss” trigger strong emotional reactions.

Goal:

• to create a sense of urgency
• to suppress rational evaluation
• to suggest that the wrong political decision could have fatal consequences

Effect:
The audience may feel that they are not choosing between political programs but that:

➡️ survival is at stake
➡️ the country must be “defended” immediately

---

3️⃣ False Dichotomy

(false dichotomy / black-and-white framing)

Excerpt:
“Only Fidesz and Viktor Orbán can guarantee all of this!”
“In four weeks on Sunday, Fidesz is the safe choice!”

Technique:
The speech reduces reality to two options only:

• Fidesz and security
• or Brussels, Ukraine, death, and loss of sovereignty

There is no nuance and no legitimate alternative.

Goal:

• to exclude all other political options
• to turn the election into a moral obligation
• to present loyalty as the only “safe” choice

Effect:
The reader may feel that:

➡️ considering other options is not acceptable
➡️ supporting Fidesz is the only responsible decision

---

4️⃣ Delegitimizing the Political Opponent

(delegitimization / traitor framing)

Excerpt:
“Orbán Anita’s people are doing exactly this.”
“…like good little pioneers…”
“…they want to push Hungary back under the Brussels boot.”

Technique:
The opponent is not portrayed as simply mistaken, but as subordinate actors serving foreign interests.
The metaphors “pioneers” and “Brussels’ boot” are humiliating and belittling.

Goal:

• to undermine the opponent’s credibility
• to portray them as traitorous or weak
• to strengthen the moral superiority of the speaker’s camp

Effect:
The message suggests that:

➡️ the opposition is not an independent political actor
➡️ but merely an executor of foreign will

---

5️⃣ Use of Strong Emotional Metaphors

(emotional metaphor / vivid imagery)

Excerpt:
“this bicycle is heading toward a cliff”
“a stick must be shoved into the spokes”
“under the Brussels boot”

Technique:
The speech uses vivid imagery to transform abstract political issues into simple and easily imaginable scenes.

What is happening here?

• EU policy = a bicycle heading toward a cliff
• resistance = sticking a stick into the spokes
• the opponent = a submissive executor
• Hungary = a body oppressed and then liberated

Goal:

• to trigger quick emotional identification
• to simplify political reality
• to anchor the narrative through dramatic imagery

Effect:
The audience remembers images rather than arguments:

➡️ the abyss
➡️ death
➡️ the boot
➡️ liberation

These emotional images are much more powerful than factual reasoning.

---

6️⃣ Presenting One’s Own Side as a Heroic Savior

(hero framing / savior narrative)

Excerpt:
“For 16 years we have been working to free Hungary…”
“…we can breathe free air…”
“…we can stand up straight…”

Technique:
The speaker’s political side is framed as a liberating force that rescued the country from external oppression.

Goal:

• to give historical significance to the government’s rule
• to portray the leader and party as saviors
• to evoke emotional gratitude

Effect:
The audience may feel that:

➡️ they have already received something from this political force
➡️ and therefore owe loyalty in return

---

7️⃣ Sovereignty as the Ultimate Political Slogan

(sovereignty framing / national identity mobilization)

Excerpt:
“…we will decide what is good for us…”
“…we do not want others interfering in this…”

Technique:
Every political issue is translated into the language of sovereignty.
Thus economic, foreign policy, EU, and energy issues become a struggle for national self-determination.

Goal:

• to elevate political debate into a national identity issue
• to morally burden the opposing side
• to frame the speaker’s side as the patriotic camp

Effect:
The audience may feel that:

➡️ agreeing with the speech means being patriotic
➡️ disagreeing means weakening national sovereignty

---

8️⃣ Construction of Cultural Panic

(moral panic / culture war framing)

Excerpt:
“gender madness”
“pro-migration policies”

Technique:
The text bundles several unrelated topics into one threatening narrative:

• gender
• migration
• Brussels
• Ukraine
• energy
• sovereignty

This is a classic culture-war panic construction.

Goal:

• to combine multiple fears into one enemy image
• to create the sense that everything is under threat at once
• to achieve total emotional mobilization

Effect:
The audience perceives not separate policy issues but a single civilizational threat.

---

9️⃣ Repetition of Claims Without Evidence

(assertion without evidence / repetition effect)

Excerpt:
“The Tisza Party has admitted this in many ways…”
“…in their leaked materials…”

Technique:
Serious claims are made without evidence, explanation, or concrete detail.
It is enough to say that something was “admitted,” “leaked,” or “revealed.”

Goal:

• to create suspicion
• to plant ready-made conclusions in the audience’s mind
• to reinforce prejudice without fact-checking

Effect:
Through repetition, people may begin to feel that:

➡️ “there must be something to it”

even if no evidence is presented.

---

🔟 Dehumanizing and Contemptuous Language

(dehumanizing / contempt signaling)

Excerpt:
“Brussels madness”
“European mass”
“pioneers”
“the Brussels boot”

Technique:
The speech does not merely argue but expresses contempt.
Opponents and external actors are described with mocking and degrading language.

Goal:

• to create emotional distance
• to legitimize contempt toward the opponent
• to turn hostility into a shared group identity

Effect:
The audience no longer sees the other side as a legitimate debate partner but as a group that can be mocked, excluded, or directed against.

---

Summary

This text represents classic political propaganda, because it:

• constructs an external enemy
• generates fear and existential anxiety
• creates a false choice
• portrays the opponent as a servant of foreign interests
• frames its own side as a national savior
• repeats serious accusations without evidence
• uses mocking and degrading language

And yes, it also appeals to hostility, because the emotional engine of the message is not simply persuasion but:

• anger
• fear
• contempt
• enemy construction

In other words, this is not just a campaign message but polarizing, emotionally charged mobilization propaganda built on enemy narratives.

I was a first-timer at the very front of the Peace March, and it was a fantastic experience! Thank you to every Hungarian who loves their homeland and came out today! We showed what the national side is made of! 🧡💪🏻

This time I was at the front for a change. I had never been at the front during the Peace March before — I usually stayed somewhere in the middle or at the back, comfortably blending in. But the number of people I saw this time… honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen that many people at any Peace March before. The atmosphere was absolutely brilliant, and the weather was wonderful.

What I see here is that there are a huge number of people who are sincerely and genuinely fed up with Ukraine and Brussels trying to tell us Hungarians what is good for us, and trying to force a government on us through pressure, threats, and blackmail — a government that would represent Ukrainian and Brussels interests. That is what I see in this crowd: that the Hungarian people’s love of freedom could not be defeated in 1848, nor in 1956, nor will it be defeated in 2026.

1️⃣ Personal experience as credibility

(personal testimony / authenticity framing)

Excerpt

“I was at the front of the Peace March for the first time… it was a fantastic experience!”

Technique

The political message is presented as a personal experience.
This is a classic communication method:

not framed as a political claim,
but as a personal account.

Goal

➡️ increase credibility
➡️ create the impression that the message is “not propaganda, but an experience.”

Effect

The reader may feel:

“She was there, so it must be true.”

---

2️⃣ Mass legitimacy

(mass legitimacy / bandwagon effect)

Excerpt

“The number of people I saw… I have never seen at any Peace March before.”

Technique

The communication emphasizes the size of the crowd.

This is the classic bandwagon effect:

“If so many people are there, then this must be the right side.”

Goal

➡️ legitimize political support
➡️ influence undecided voters

Effect

The reader may begin to feel:

“The majority is already on this side.”

---

3️⃣ Positive emotional framing

(positive emotional framing)

Excerpt

“fantastic experience”
“amazing atmosphere”
“wonderful weather”

Technique

The event is presented as a positive emotional experience.

This transforms the political event into:

➡️ a community celebration
➡️ a pleasant shared experience

Goal

➡️ create emotional identification
➡️ mobilize supporters

Effect

The political message gradually becomes an emotional attachment rather than a political argument.

---

4️⃣ Construction of an external enemy

(external enemy framing)

Excerpt

“They want to tell us from Ukraine and from Brussels what is good for us…”

Technique

The communication blames external actors.

Key elements

• Ukraine
• Brussels

Goal

➡️ define a common enemy
➡️ simplify internal political conflict

Effect

The political debate appears as:

not Hungarian domestic politics,
but a struggle against external interference.

---

5️⃣ National sovereignty narrative

(sovereignty framing / national identity framing)

Excerpt

“They want to tell us what is good for us Hungarians.”

Technique

The political conflict is framed as a question of national self-determination.

Goal

➡️ elevate the election to a national issue
➡️ mobilize identity-based support

Effect

The debate becomes framed as:

not government vs opposition,
but

➡️ Hungarians vs foreign interests

---

6️⃣ Threat narrative

(threat framing / siege narrative)

Excerpt

“with force, threats and blackmail”

Technique

The communication suggests that:

➡️ external forces are trying to pressure Hungary.

Goal

➡️ trigger defensive instincts
➡️ strengthen political loyalty

Effect

The reader may feel:

“We must defend ourselves.”

---

7️⃣ Historical heroic narrative

(historical myth framing / national resilience narrative)

Excerpt

“not in 1848, not in 1956, and not in 2026”

Technique

The current political conflict is linked to the historical struggles of

➡️ 1848
➡️ 1956

Goal

➡️ elevate the political debate to historical significance
➡️ place one’s own side in the role of freedom fighters

Effect

Readers may feel that:

“Those who stand with them are on the right side of history.”

---

Summary

The text follows a classic political propaganda structure:

1️⃣ personal experience
2️⃣ mass legitimacy
3️⃣ positive emotional framing
4️⃣ external enemy
5️⃣ sovereignty narrative
6️⃣ dramatization of threats
7️⃣ historical freedom-fight narrative

Together these create a typical political mobilization narrative:

➡️ “we, the Hungarian people”
➡️ “against external forces”
➡️ “as part of a historical struggle.”

Do you see this, Zelensky? This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians. We could not be broken before, and we will not be broken now. We will not give in to blackmail or the pressure of an oil blockade.

Together with the national government, we stand on the side of peace, and no kind of blackmail will change that.

Do you see this, Ukrainians? Do you see it, Zelensky? This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians. And you think you can scare us with an oil blockade, with blackmail, or by threatening our leaders? Use your common sense and stop this.

Anyone who wants to break the Hungarians would have had to wake up much earlier — several hundred years earlier.

1️⃣ Invocation of Historical Identity

(historical identity framing / civilizational narrative)

Excerpt

“This is the thousand-year-old state of the Hungarians.”

Technique

The speech places the current political conflict within the long arc of Hungarian history.
The phrase “thousand-year-old state” is one of the strongest symbols of national identity.

Key elements

• thousand-year-old state
• historical continuity
• national survival

Goal

➡️ to give the political position historical legitimacy
➡️ to elevate the conflict to a civilizational level

Effect

The reader may feel that

• this is not merely a current political dispute,
• but rather a defense of Hungarian history itself.

---

2️⃣ Narrative of National Resistance

(resilience framing / defiance rhetoric)

Excerpt

“They have never been able to break us, and they never will.”

Technique

The communication invokes the narrative of resistance and survival that is often associated with Hungarian history.

This reflects a common rhetorical pattern referencing periods such as:

• the Mongol invasion
• the Ottoman occupation
• the Habsburg era
• the Soviet occupation

Goal

➡️ to create strong collective pride
➡️ to identify the political stance with national resilience

Effect

The message implies that:

• those who support it → are part of the national resistance
• those who oppose it → weaken that resistance.

---

3️⃣ Construction of an External Enemy

(external enemy framing)

Excerpt

“Do you see this, Zelensky?”
“Do you see this, Ukrainians?”

Technique

The communication identifies a specific external actor in the conflict.

This simplifies the political situation into a binary framework:

us ↔ them

Key elements

• direct reference to Zelensky
• collective reference to “Ukrainians”

Goal

➡️ to create a clear conflict frame
➡️ to strengthen internal political unity

Effect

Readers may feel that

• the country is under external pressure or attack.

---

4️⃣ Framing of Blackmail and Threat

(victim framing / coercion narrative)

Excerpt

“We will not yield to blackmail or to the pressure of an oil blockade.”

Technique

The speech portrays Hungary as a party under pressure.

Key words

• blackmail
• blockade
• threat

Goal

➡️ to legitimize resistance
➡️ to establish moral superiority

Effect

The message suggests that

• Hungary is acting defensively, not aggressively.

---

5️⃣ Peace Narrative

(peace framing)

Excerpt

“We stand on the side of peace.”

Technique

The political stance is framed as a moral category.

Implicit framing:

• us → peace
• opponents → conflict

Goal

➡️ to establish moral legitimacy

Effect

Readers may feel that

• supporting this position becomes a moral duty.

---

6️⃣ Direct Address

(direct address rhetoric)

Excerpt

“Do you see this, Zelensky?”
“Use your common sense.”

Technique

The speech directly addresses the opponent.

This dramatises the conflict and makes it more personal.

Goal

➡️ to create stronger rhetorical impact
➡️ to frame the situation almost like a political “duel”

Effect

The message becomes

• more confrontational
• more emotionally intense.

---

7️⃣ Hyperbolic Historical Reference

(hyperbolic historical reference)

Excerpt

“Anyone who wants to break the Hungarians would have to wake up much earlier — several centuries earlier.”

Technique

The speech uses exaggerated historical reference to reinforce the narrative.

This reflects the classic rhetorical motif:

“Hungarians cannot be defeated.”

Goal

➡️ to evoke emotional identification
➡️ to increase collective pride

Effect

For the audience, the speech can appear

• inspiring
• mobilizing.

---

Overall Structure

The message builds on three main narratives:

1️⃣ National identity

• thousand-year-old state
• historical survival

2️⃣ External threat

• Zelensky
• blackmail
• blockade

3️⃣ Moral positioning

• we stand on the side of peace
• we resist pressure

This structure represents typical mobilizing political communication, which:

• activates national identity
• dramatizes an external conflict
• builds a moral framework around the political stance.