Orbán, the government, and their mouthpieces, like Balázs Németh. It is frightening how ignorant the Tisza supporters are and how little they understand European processes. Take Zoltán Horváth, for example. He sent a message in a video. They accuse us of scaremongering with war, of stirring up fear of war.
We are not the ones scaring people, dear Zoltán. Merz, Macron, Rutte, the NATO Secretary General—they are all talking about it. Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber, the boss of Péter Magyar—they are all talking about Europe having to go to war. So who is constantly talking about war?
And it also needs to be examined, dear Zoltán Horváth, how much money Europe is spending on armament. They are the ones who want war. And who is it that wants to live in peace?
The stake of the April election is war or peace. Fidesz stands on the side of peace; Viktor Orbán has already proven himself. Péter Magyar, on the other hand, is Brussels’ man, and he would not be able to prevent Hungary from being dragged into the war. That is why one must not vote for Tisza.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The purpose of this text is not to analyze the war situation, but to:
- generate existential fear (“war or peace”),
- demonize the opponent (Magyar Péter portrayed as someone who would drag the country into war),
- justify leadership exclusivity (“only Orbán can protect us”),
- apply psychological pressure on voters.
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end; it is pre-determined:
Fidesz = peace / Tisza = war.
1️⃣ Authority Stacking
“Merz, Macron, Rutte, the NATO Secretary General… Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber…”
🔹 Technique: stacking authorities
🔹 How it works:
- different countries,
- different positions,
- different contexts
→ blurred into a single, homogeneous “pro-war bloc.”
🔹 The trick:
- no precise quotations,
- no context,
- no distinction between political, military, deterrence, or defensive rhetoric.
👉 The goal is not understanding, but psychological pressure:
“everyone says this → therefore it must be true.”
2️⃣ Projection – “We are not fear-mongering”
“We are not fear-mongering, dear Zoltán…”
🔹 Technique: projection
🔹 Essence:
- denies the very act of fear-mongering,
- then intensifies it in the same sentence.
👉 A classic propaganda paradox:
“this is not fear-mongering, we’re just talking about death.”
3️⃣ Total False Dilemma
“The stake of the April election is war or peace.”
🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 What is deliberately left out:
- the legal constraints of NATO membership,
- the real decision-making mechanisms of the EU,
- Hungary’s actual room for maneuver.
👉 A complex reality → reduced to a two-button panic panel.
4️⃣ Enemy Construction Tied to a Person
“Magyar Péter is Brussels’ man…”
🔹 Technique: scapegoating + foreign-agent narrative
🔹 Effect:
- not a political debate,
- but a loyalty test.
👉 The question is not:
“is it true?”
but:
“which side are you on?”
5️⃣ “Orbán has already proven himself” – Legitimacy Without Evidence
🔹 Technique: narrative self-justification
🔹 What is missing:
- when,
- how,
- under what international circumstances,
- compared to which alternatives.
👉 The word “proven” functions as an emotional stamp, not an argument.
🧠 Meta-Level Recognition
This is not a foreign-policy discussion, but:
- a campaign-closing psychological framework,
- fear-based decision coercion,
- justification of authoritarian leadership demand.
The listener is not expected to think,
but to fear and obey.
🔑 The Core in One Sentence
This text is not about
whether there will be a war,
but about making sure that without fear, no one can vote for anyone other than Orbán Viktor’s party.