❗ The position of the Hungarian government is clear and stable: we will not send money, weapons, or our sons to Ukraine. Nor do we support Ukraine’s accession to the European Union, because that would effectively bring the war into the EU.

The Tisza party, on the other hand, would form a pro-Ukrainian government and disregard Hungarian national interests. A former Ukrainian intelligence officer has even claimed that money is being sent from Ukraine to Péter Magyar—vacuum-sealed bundles of €100 notes used to finance the Tisza campaign.

🤝 In Polgárdi, we also shared a common position: we must not allow interference in Hungarian elections. We will preserve Hungary’s sovereignty and peace.

The Hungarian government has made the right decision by stating that we will not send money or weapons into this war, nor do we want to become involved in it indirectly—by bringing the war into the European Union instead of sending our own people to fight. That is why the government has taken a firm stance: we are not willing to support Ukraine’s current or future EU accession.

This country is currently at war, and beyond that, it does not meet the conditions required for EU membership. Moreover, it is often described in reports as a corrupt, mafia-like state. Apologies for the wording, but many of you have likely seen reports about large sums of money and gold moving in unexpected directions—from Ukraine westward and in other directions as well.

You may also have come across reports of a former Ukrainian intelligence officer who claimed that this money constitutes Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s black funds—resources allegedly used to influence foreign elections, including supporting Péter Magyar in Hungary.

🧠 What is actually happening in this message?

👉 Main narrative

• “Ukraine is dangerous and corrupt”
• “the war would spill into the EU”
• “external interference in Hungarian elections”
• “we will protect you from this”
  → therefore you should vote for us

👉 Hidden formula

fear + enemy image + corruption + sovereignty + election

➡️ “if you don’t choose us → war + chaos + external control”

---

🔍 Influence techniques

1️⃣ Fear appeal (existential threat)

👉 Excerpt:

• “we would bring the war into the European Union”
• “we don’t want to get involved”

👉 Technique:

• presents the war as a direct threat to you
• not geopolitics → but personal danger

👉 Goal:
➡️ immediate emotional reaction (fear)

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t analyze → you seek safety

---

2️⃣ Enemy construction (enemy framing)

👉 Excerpt:

• “corrupt mafia state”
• “Zelensky’s black money”

👉 Technique:

• delegitimizing an entire country
• demonizing its leader

👉 Goal:
➡️ create moral rejection

👉 Effect:
➡️ “they are not a partner we can cooperate with”

---

3️⃣ Unverified claims (insinuation)

👉 Excerpt:

• “you’ve probably seen the news”
• “a former Ukrainian intelligence officer said”

👉 Technique:

• no concrete sources
• “everyone knows” type of argument

👉 Goal:
➡️ create an illusion of credibility without evidence

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t verify → you accept

---

4️⃣ Conspiracy framing

👉 Excerpt:

• “foreign money interfering in Hungarian elections”

👉 Technique:

• hidden external forces
• linking political opponents to a foreign power

👉 Goal:
➡️ build distrust toward the opposition

👉 Effect:
➡️ “this is not internal debate → it’s an attack”

---

5️⃣ False causality

👉 Excerpt:

• “Ukraine joining the EU = war in the EU”

👉 Technique:

• simplified, deterministic relationship

👉 Reality:

• this is a political interpretation, not an automatic consequence

👉 Goal:
➡️ simplify decision-making

👉 Effect:
➡️ “if X → then definitely Y”

---

6️⃣ “We protect you” framing (protector framing)

👉 Excerpt:

• “we won’t send money, weapons, or soldiers”
• “firm stance”

👉 Technique:

• government positioned as protector

👉 Goal:
➡️ build a sense of security

👉 Effect:
➡️ emotional attachment to power

---

7️⃣ Sovereignty activation (patriotic framing)

👉 Excerpt:

• “we will not allow interference”

👉 Technique:

• emphasis on national independence

👉 Goal:
➡️ identity-based mobilization

👉 Effect:
➡️ “if you disagree → you’re not defending the country”

---

⚠️ Incitement – is it present?

👉 Not direct incitement, but:

✔️ Strong elements:

• enemy construction
• moral degradation (“mafia state”)
• conspiracy narrative

❗ This can be considered indirect incitement:
➡️ increases hostility
➡️ reduces empathy
➡️ legitimizes rejection

---

🧩 Overall picture

This text:

• does not aim to inform
• but to create an emotional state

Core mechanism:

👉 fear
👉 enemy
👉 protection
👉 election

➡️ “there is danger → we protect you → choose us”

---

🧠 What you correctly noticed

Your initial reaction is accurate:

👉 exaggeration of an unlikely threat

• “a country at war → manipulating Hungary”

👉 disproportion

• a war-torn country framed as a primary domestic threat

👉 emotional exaggeration

• built on reaction, not reality

---

📌 In short

This is a typical campaign message:

➡️ fear appeal
➡️ enemy construction
➡️ unverified claims
➡️ “we are the protection” narrative

→ goal: not thinking, but decision-making

❗ Security is not a game!

Shocking news has arrived from near our southern border: Serbian military intelligence had been warning for months about a possible sabotage operation targeting the region’s gas infrastructure.

Over the weekend, near Magyarkanizsa, equipment suitable for explosive devices was found — hermetically sealed explosives, detonators, and other dangerous materials.

👉 The question is: who placed these tools intended for a bomb and a terrorist attack there, and for what purpose?

For Hungary, energy security is not an ideological issue, but a national interest. We have always made it clear: the infrastructure necessary for the country’s operation must be protected — whether against external pressure or sabotage attempts.

Recent years have proven that in an uncertain geopolitical environment, only strong, sovereign decisions can guarantee the safety of Hungarian people.

We do not take risks. We will protect Hungary. 🇭🇺
On Sunday, Fidesz is the only safe choice!

👉 Main narrative

• “there is an immediate danger” ⚠️
• “there could have been a terrorist attack”
• “energy supply = a matter of survival”
• “only we can protect you”
• “→ therefore vote for us”

---

👉 Underlying formula
fear + security + uncertainty + political solution
→ “if you don’t choose us → you will be in danger”

---

🔍 Influence techniques

1️⃣ Shock opening (shock framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“❗Security is not a game!”
“Shocking news…”

👉 Technique:

• immediate emotional impact
• no context, just alarm

👉 Goal:
➡️ grab attention
➡️ push you into an emotional state

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t think → you react

---

2️⃣ Fear appeal (existential threat)

👉 Excerpt:
“sabotage operation”
“explosive devices”
“terrorist attack”

👉 Technique:

• elevates the situation to life-threatening level
• concrete, visual danger (explosion)

👉 Goal:
➡️ trigger fear

👉 Effect:
➡️ you seek safety → you cling to protection

---

3️⃣ Information fog (missing details)

👉 Excerpt:
“possible sabotage operation”
“devices were found”

👉 Technique:

• no specific perpetrator
• no detailed evidence
• “could have happened” type claims

👉 Goal:
➡️ make it hard to verify
➡️ leave space for imagination

👉 Effect:
➡️ fear becomes bigger than facts

---

4️⃣ Suggestive questioning

👉 Excerpt:
“👉 who placed these… and for what purpose?”

👉 Technique:

• implies without stating
• guides thinking through a question

👉 Goal:
➡️ make you fill in the gap (usually with an “enemy”)

👉 Effect:
➡️ feels like your own conclusion → stronger belief

---

5️⃣ Critical infrastructure = life or death (security framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“energy security”
“infrastructure necessary for the country’s operation”

👉 Technique:

• turns an abstract concept (energy) into personal survival

👉 Goal:
➡️ maximize perceived importance

👉 Effect:
➡️ “if this fails → everything collapses”

---

6️⃣ Protector framing

👉 Excerpt:
“We will protect Hungary”

👉 Technique:

• they = protectors
• implicit: others = not

👉 Goal:
➡️ build trust + dependency

👉 Effect:
➡️ “we need them to survive”

---

7️⃣ False dilemma (one solution only)

👉 Excerpt:
“only strong, sovereign decisions guarantee…”
“only Fidesz is the safe choice”

👉 Technique:

• reduces multiple options to one
• complex world → simple answer

👉 Goal:
➡️ simplify decision-making

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t evaluate → you choose

---

8️⃣ Fear → vote (mobilization)

👉 Structure:

• danger
• uncertainty
• promise of protection
• voting instruction

👉 Goal:
➡️ emotional voting

👉 Effect:
➡️ decision not based on policy/program

---

⚠️ Summary

👉 This text is not meant to inform, but to:

• generate fear
• leave uncertainty
• then provide a specific political solution

👉 Core pattern:
“there is danger → we will protect you → vote for us”

👉 What you’re feeling (exaggeration, “fear escalation”) is a logical reaction, because the message:

uses uncertainty as a tool

is built on emotional triggers

deliberately avoids full context

❗ The Ukrainians are repeatedly attacking Russian energy networks, and they have made it clear that they want to cut Europe off from Russian energy.

Hungary cannot afford to allow that: we need this energy, and we will protect our pipelines. If TurkStream were to go down, it would put hundreds of thousands of families at risk, which is why the Hungarian Armed Forces must be ready to defend it.

Europe is heading toward an increasingly severe energy crisis, so it is time to abandon these senseless sanctions and rethink the current policy.

🟠 On Sunday, only Fidesz is the safe choice!

What were you doing today, on Easter Monday, at six in the morning? Well, I imagine many of you were asleep, some were getting ready to welcome the Easter sprinklers, or preparing to go sprinkling themselves, especially those who got up very early. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister set off for the area near Kiskundorozsma, on the Hungarian side of the Serbian-Hungarian border, because yesterday news arrived that on the Serbian side of Vojvodina, near the TurkStream gas pipeline, a large quantity of explosives had been found, suggesting that some kind of sabotage or terrorist attack had been planned. Clearly, the intention would have been to attack this gas pipeline.

This is extremely important for us because the Ukrainians had already suspended the Russian gas supply that ran through Ukraine at the end of 2022, meaning they shut it off, just as the Druzhba pipeline has since been shut off as well. But we had an alternative that provided a satisfactory replacement, namely the TurkStream gas pipeline, which bypasses Ukraine. However, if something were to happen to that as well, it would mean that Hungarian industry would face a very serious threat, and the energy supply of several hundred thousand Hungarians could also be endangered. So this is no game.

That is why the Prime Minister yesterday convened the Defense Council over this matter, and today he personally went there with Péter Szijjártó to check whether the soldiers are doing everything necessary, and whether the state of defense readiness directed at this section of the pipeline is being properly maintained.

And that is why I say this election is no game. We are living in a period, in times, when Europe as a whole is in a serious energy crisis, and when two wars are taking place not too far from us. At a time like this, we need experienced leaders who have already seen crises, handled difficult situations, and know what needs to be done in a situation like this.

---

🧠 What is actually happening in this message?

👉 Main narrative
“Ukraine is threatening energy supply” ⚠️
“Hungary is in danger”
“only we can protect you”
“→ therefore vote for us”

👉 Hidden formula

fear + energy + war + leadership competence + election
→ “if you don’t choose us → there will be trouble”

---

🔍 Manipulation techniques

1️⃣ Fearmongering (existential threat framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“hundreds of thousands of families could be at risk”
“this is no joke”

👉 Technique:

• elevates energy supply to a life-or-death issue
• creates a direct sense of danger

👉 Goal:
➡️ immediate emotional reaction (fear)

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t analyze → you seek safety

---

2️⃣ Enemy construction (enemy framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“the Ukrainians are repeatedly attacking…”
“they want to cut Europe off”

👉 Technique:

• simplifies a complex situation to a single actor (Ukraine)
• assigns intention (“they want to cut it off”)

👉 Goal:
➡️ clearly designate a “scapegoat”

👉 Effect:
➡️ simpler thinking: “there’s someone to blame”

---

3️⃣ False causality (unproven causal link)

👉 Excerpt:

• explosives → “Ukrainian sabotage” (stated or implied)
• energy situation → “they caused it”

👉 Technique:

• no concrete evidence, just linking things together
• event + assumed perpetrator

👉 Goal:
➡️ build a narrative without proof

👉 Effect:
➡️ the audience receives a “ready-made story”

---

4️⃣ “We will protect you” (protector framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“we will protect it”
“the army is ready”

👉 Technique:

• government = protector
• state = security

👉 Goal:
➡️ create dependency (“you need them”)

👉 Effect:
➡️ trust + loyalty

---

5️⃣ Oversimplification of complex reality

👉 Reality:
energy supply = multiple actors, geopolitics, markets, infrastructure

👉 Message:
“Ukraine → problem”
“we → solution”

👉 Goal:
➡️ create an easy-to-consume story

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t examine the details

---

6️⃣ False dilemma (forced choice)

👉 Excerpt:
“only Fidesz is the safe choice”

👉 Technique:

• no alternatives
• either them, or danger

👉 Goal:
➡️ simplify decision-making

👉 Effect:
➡️ narrows your thinking

---

7️⃣ Crisis + leader coupling

👉 Excerpt:
“Orbán personally went there”
“we need an experienced leader”

👉 Technique:

• connects crisis with the leader
• dramatizes personal presence

👉 Goal:
➡️ strengthen leadership legitimacy

👉 Effect:
➡️ “without him, it wouldn’t work”

---

⚠️ What is especially important from your perspective

What you’re saying (self-sabotage, Russian narrative, etc.) is a counter-narrative, but the text:

👉 does NOT prove anything
👉 it only suggests + connects + dramatizes

This is key:

➡️ it does not present facts → it sells an interpretation as if it were a fact

---

🧩 Overall picture (short)

This message:

• does not aim to inform
• but to emotionally influence + mobilize

Formula:

👉 threat (Ukraine)
👉 + fear (energy, families)
👉 + protection (government)
👉 + election (vote for us)

➡️ = classic campaign propaganda

---

💬 About your intuition

What you feel (“over the top”, “doesn’t add up”) comes from exactly this:

👉 too much:

• assumptions
• emotional charge
• political conclusions

👉 too little:

• concrete evidence
• verifiable data

“This is who we are! We show that there is no hatred or anger that cannot be overcome by the power of love and unity!”

I also make an effort not to impose on each other here—it’s not necessary. If we know that someone thinks very differently, then it’s better to avoid that topic, because there are so many other things where we see the world the same way. If we are friends, then just because we don’t agree in public affairs, we don’t have to talk about that.

At the same time, I see it the other way around—that from the other side there always seems to be this kind of provocation: if someone knows that we think differently about an issue, then they push it anyway.

We need to set an example. We represent a Christian-conservative example and cause, and we need a great deal of self-discipline, because we do not want to become like what we experience. And of course, it is a basic Christian principle: do not do to others what you would not want done to you.

So no matter how tense everyone’s nerves have become, let’s remain calm and composed. That’s why this community is in such a good mood. Yes. It is. This community.

👉 Main narrative

“we = calm, loving, disciplined”
“they = provoking, creating tension”
“we are morally superior”
“→ therefore our side is the right one”

---

👉 Hidden formula

moral superiority + community identity + subtle enemy image
→ “we are the good ones → you should identify with us”

---

🔍 Persuasion techniques

---

1️⃣ Moral high ground framing

👉 Example:
“there is no hatred… that love cannot overcome”
“Christian principle…”

👉 Technique:

• own side = morally pure, good
• references to universal values (love, peace)

👉 Goal:
➡️ gain moral legitimacy

👉 Effect:
➡️ those who disagree → “not on the good side”

---

2️⃣ Implicit enemy framing

👉 Example:
“the provocation always comes from there”

👉 Technique:

• no specific group named
• but a clear “they” group is created

👉 Goal:
➡️ maintain conflict, but in a seemingly peaceful tone

👉 Effect:
➡️ subconsciously: “they are the bad ones”

---

3️⃣ “Us vs. them” framing (soft polarization)

👉 Example:
“we don’t want to be like them”

👉 Technique:

• classic polarization
• but framed as a moral difference, not aggression

👉 Goal:
➡️ strengthen group identity

👉 Effect:
➡️ “we = better people”

---

4️⃣ In-group bonding (community identity building)

👉 Example:
“this is who we are”
“this community”

👉 Technique:

• strong “we” narrative
• emotional attachment to the group

👉 Goal:
➡️ increase loyalty

👉 Effect:
➡️ leaving = emotional loss

---

5️⃣ Virtue framing (self-discipline as a moral tool)

👉 Example:
“we need a lot of self-discipline”

👉 Technique:

• turns political behavior into a moral issue
• not strategy → but “good person vs bad person”

👉 Goal:
➡️ control behavior within the group

👉 Effect:
➡️ even internal criticism can seem “immoral”

---

6️⃣ Conflict avoidance framing

👉 Example:
“better not to talk about this”

👉 Technique:

• avoidance of political debate
• justified in the name of “peace”

👉 Goal:
➡️ reduce critical discussion

👉 Effect:
➡️ fewer clashes → less scrutiny

---

7️⃣ Religious framing (moral legitimization)

👉 Example:
“Christian principle…”

👉 Technique:

• introduces religious norms
• political stance = moral command

👉 Goal:
➡️ present it as beyond debate

👉 Effect:
➡️ criticism = “moral attack”

---

⚖️ Overall picture

This is “positive-looking but highly structured propaganda”, where:

• there is no open attack
• there is no explicit lie
• but strong emotional and identity-based influence is present

👉 The key:

it doesn’t say the opponent is bad —
it says “we are good”
→ and everything else follows automatically

---

🧠 In short

👉 Type of communication:

• “soft propaganda”
• “moral framing”
• “identity-based mobilization”

👉 Main effect:

➡️ it doesn’t make you think → it makes you identify

Please share this video and send it to your friends who haven’t made their decision yet! Let’s not take risks! Fidesz is the only safe choice!

The elections are just a week away, and I thought we should briefly gather the arguments we can use when talking to those who may not want to vote for Fidesz, or who are still undecided about where to place their X on Sunday. I think it’s very important that over the next week we talk about this as much as possible with everyone who is open to it.

First, I suggest that everyone reflect on their own personal life and the changes that have taken place over the past decade and a half. For example, what was it like to start a family before the national government, and what is it like now? What tax benefits are available? What additional support exists? What home-creation opportunities are there?

Or what was it like to be a young person starting a career? Were there tax exemptions for those under 25? Were there free language exams or free driving theory tests? Was there a 3% home-start program?

Or as a parent, what was it like sending your child to school in September? How many things did you have to buy, like textbooks—which children now receive for free?

Or what was it like to be a pensioner? What was it like when you had to pay those massive gas and utility bills before 2010? What was it like before the 13th (and 14th) month pension, before pension corrections or pension bonuses?

I think everyone can go through these in their own life and consider what has changed over the past 16 years. And I believe that if someone honestly adds it all up, they will conclude that even though the government has had to perform under difficult circumstances—there was COVID, and now there is a war and a global energy crisis—despite all this, everyone has still been able to take one, two, or even more steps forward.

The second thing I suggest considering is this: regardless of party preference, no one can claim that what we see in the world right now is reassuring. The signs point to the coming years not being calm or secure in terms of the global environment around us.

In such a situation, what is the right choice? In such times, it’s better to have someone at the helm of the government who has, over the past decade and a half, known what to do in every unexpected situation—whether it was migration or the current war. Or should we experiment and entrust the country to a political adventurer to steer the nation through perhaps the most turbulent period of our lives?

I truly believe that everyone should think through these two questions—regardless of party politics—before next Sunday, before placing their X. Because we are not deciding just four years—we are deciding our future.

So I ask for your help: talk to as many people as possible about this. And simply ask them to think these things through. If their own future matters to them, if their family’s future matters, if security matters, if predictable utility costs matter, if it matters that a government with a steady hand continues to lead our lives—then Fidesz is the only safe choice.

🧠 What is actually happening in this message?

👉 Main narrative

• “everything has gotten better with us”
• “the world is dangerous”
• “only we can protect you”
• “if you don’t choose us → you’re taking a risk”

👉 Underlying formula

nostalgia + fear + security + mobilization
→ “don’t analyze → feel → and convince others too”

---

🔍 Influence techniques

1️⃣ Network-based spread (grassroots mobilization)

👉 Excerpt:
“Share this… send it… talk about it”

👉 Technique:

• not media → but person → person
• personal recommendation → much stronger

👉 Goal:
➡️ decentralize propaganda
➡️ “you become part of the campaign”

👉 Effect:
➡️ trust increases (because it’s not “official”)
➡️ rapid spread

---

2️⃣ “Think through your own life” (internalization framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“everyone should think it through in their own life…”

👉 Technique:

• doesn’t provide data
• relies on internal, personal experience

👉 Goal:
➡️ don’t verify → feel it as true

👉 Effect:
➡️ distorted memory (confirmation bias)
➡️ “it really did get better… maybe…”

---

3️⃣ List overload (list flooding)

👉 Excerpt:

• tax benefits
• under-25 tax exemption
• free textbooks
• pensions, etc.

👉 Technique:

• many positives in rapid succession
• no context / no nuance

👉 Goal:
➡️ persuade through quantity

👉 Effect:
➡️ “so many things happened” feeling
➡️ you don’t examine them individually

---

4️⃣ Idealizing the past (contrast framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“what was it like before 2010…”

👉 Technique:

• past = bad
• present = better

👉 Goal:
➡️ create a simple black-and-white picture

👉 Effect:
➡️ oversimplification of a complex reality

---

5️⃣ Crisis framing

👉 Excerpt:
“war”, “energy crisis”, “uncertain world”

👉 Technique:

• constant emphasis on threats

👉 Goal:
➡️ increase uncertainty

👉 Effect:
➡️ stronger need for security
➡️ reduced critical thinking

---

6️⃣ “Strong leader vs. experimentation” (false dilemma)

👉 Excerpt:
“reliable leader” vs “political adventurer”

👉 Technique:

• only two options presented
• no middle ground

👉 Goal:
➡️ narrow the choice

👉 Effect:
➡️ “there is no real alternative”

---

7️⃣ Fear + family (ultimate trigger)

👉 Excerpt:
“family’s future”, “security”, “utility costs”

👉 Technique:

• strongest emotional triggers

👉 Goal:
➡️ make politics personal

👉 Effect:
➡️ non-rational decision-making
➡️ defensive reaction

---

8️⃣ “Not 4 years, but the future” (high-stakes framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“we’re not deciding for four years”

👉 Technique:

• exaggerating the weight of the decision

👉 Goal:
➡️ urgency + pressure

👉 Effect:
➡️ “I can’t make a mistake” feeling

---

9️⃣ Seemingly neutral request (soft manipulation)

👉 Excerpt:
“just think it through”

👉 Technique:

• not a direct command
• but guidance disguised as a question

👉 Goal:
➡️ reduce resistance

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t perceive it as manipulation

---

🧠 Overall picture – what is this really?

This is a very clean, textbook example of mobilizing propaganda:

👉 4 core elements:

• rewriting the past in a positive light
• framing the present as dangerous
• constructing a strong leader image
• involving people in spreading the message

---

⚠️ Why it feels so irritating (rightfully so)

• it doesn’t debate → it directs
• it doesn’t provide data → it builds on emotions
• it doesn’t leave space → it narrows choices
• it uses you → as a distribution channel

---

And yes:
it is especially effective among older, uncertain, or less informed audiences, because it:

• relies on personal experience
• triggers fear
• offers simple answers

---

🧩 In short

This is not an “opinion”, but:

➡️ a text designed to influence behavior

❗ From this year on, every German young person between the ages of 17 and 45 must request permission from the state if they want to leave the country for an extended period. The main goal of the new military service law is to expand the army’s size from 180,000 to 260,000 in the near future.

And even after this, there are still those who claim that we are talking about non-existent threats. At a time when more and more countries are reintroducing compulsory military service, and defense ministers and politicians are speaking about an approaching major war.

🟠 One thing is certain: as long as the national government remains, we will protect Hungary’s peace and security! We will not allow ourselves to be dragged into a meaningless war, which is why Fidesz is the only safe choice!

Tia Szandra, have you heard about German young people not being allowed to leave their country without permission? In fact, I’ve also heard—though things might be getting mixed up in my head, since there is so much war preparation across Europe—that not only young people, but perhaps even men up to the age of 50 would need special permission if they want to go abroad for more than three months.

And after all this, can anyone still say that when we talk about Europe pushing itself into war hysteria, we are not telling the truth? Then one should read the foreign press and see what is happening in countries with pro-war leadership.

We still do not want either a pro-Ukraine or a pro-war leadership—this will also be decided on April 12, and Fidesz is the only safe choice.

👉 Why it came to your mind:

• a completely mind-bending, chaotic experience
• distorted reality, hallucinations
• that feeling of “what is real and what is not”

---

🧠 What’s happening in the text you quoted – why it feels similar

The text you brought creates the same effect as the film — just in politics:

👉 overload + fear + uncertainty

---

🔍 Quick breakdown

1️⃣ Fear-mongering (very strong)

• “they won’t be allowed to leave the country”
• “war preparations”
• “our sons will be taken”

➡️ This is the strongest trigger (family + freedom)

---

2️⃣ Information confusion (overload / mixing)

• “I heard something… maybe I’m mixing it up…”
• throwing around claims without specifics

➡️ Goal: you can’t verify → you just feel

---

3️⃣ False generalization

• “more and more countries”
• “Europe is in a war frenzy”

➡️ no concrete evidence → but it feels global

---

4️⃣ Forcing the solution

• “only Fidesz is the safe choice”

➡️ classic formula:
👉 fear → then “we will protect you”

---

⚠️ About the specific claim (Germany)

👉 There is no general rule that:

• people aged 17–45 cannot leave the country
• or that permission is required to travel

👉 What is real:

• several countries are strengthening their militaries
• there are debates about conscription

👉 What is not true like this:

• a mass travel restriction for civilians in Germany

---

🧠 Why it feels like “mental chaos”

Because this is what’s happening:

👉 real elements + exaggeration + invented details + emotion
= a completely distorted picture

Just like in the film:
👉 reality + hallucination blend together

The dream of the Brussels elite, including Manfred Weber, is for European Union soldiers to march into Ukraine and fight. But in reality, this would mean that member states would have to send money and soldiers into the war.

From the very beginning, we have stood firm in saying that we will not send money or weapons to Zelensky and his people, and we will not send our sons to the front! But for that, we need to make the right decision on April 12. Fidesz is the safe choice!

For EU-uniformed soldiers to march into Ukraine and fight—this is Mr. Weber’s dream. I could talk at length here about what kind of person would have such a dream. I think we have very different dreams here. But it’s worth pausing for a moment, because this is once again an astonishing example of deceptive, manipulative language—essentially a lie. Let’s look behind it.

Does the European Union have money? No, it doesn’t. The member states have money, which is collected from them—and that is what would be sent.

Does the European Union have an army? No, it doesn’t. The member states have armies, which would have to be assembled and then send their sons to war.

So the Prime Minister is right when he says that they always talk about what the EU should do because the leaders of countries do not dare to admit to their own voters and their own people: that I, as the German Chancellor, take responsibility for sending this amount of money—German taxpayers’ money—to Ukraine. And that I will send this many people—your sons, dear Germans, dear German parents, thousands or tens of thousands of them—to fight there.

🧠 What is actually happening in this message?

👉 Main narrative

• “Brussels wants war” ⚠️
• “The EU would send soldiers to Ukraine”
• “we will protect you from this”
• “→ therefore vote for us”

👉 Hidden formula:

fear + family (our sons) + sovereignty + election
→ “if you don’t vote for us → your child will be taken to war”

---

🔍 Manipulation techniques

1️⃣ Fear appeal (existential threat)

👉 Example:
“sending our sons to the front”

👉 Technique:

• highly personal, strongest trigger: child / family
• not abstract politics → but “YOUR son”

👉 Goal:
➡️ immediate emotional reaction (fear, defense)

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t analyze → you want to protect

---

2️⃣ False simplification (false causality)

👉 Example:
“the EU would send soldiers” → “member states would send their sons”

👉 Technique:

• complex geopolitical issue → reduced to a single-step cause-effect
• no legal or political context

👉 Reality:

• the EU has no army of its own
• such decisions require member state political decisions
• it is not an automatic process

👉 Effect:
➡️ it feels like a direct, imminent threat

---

3️⃣ Enemy framing

👉 Example:
“Brussels elite”, “Weber’s dream”

👉 Technique:

• specific person + abstract enemy (“elite”)
• suggests intent: “they want this”

👉 Goal:
➡️ anger + distrust

👉 Effect:
➡️ not political debate → moral conflict (“they are bad”)

---

4️⃣ “We protect you” (protector framing)

👉 Example:
“we will not send our sons to the front”

👉 Technique:

• threat → immediate solution
• government = protector

👉 Goal:
➡️ create a sense of security

👉 Effect:
➡️ “only they can protect us”

---

5️⃣ False dilemma

👉 Message logic:

• either them → peace
• or others → war

👉 Technique:

• no middle ground
• political choice = life-or-death decision

👉 Effect:
➡️ forced choice

---

6️⃣ Repetition (core propaganda tool)

👉 Example:

• “EU soldiers”
• “they will send our sons”

👉 Technique:

• repeating the same imagery
• imprinting it

👉 Effect:
➡️ over time it feels like a fact
(illusory truth effect)

---

7️⃣ Moral outrage + character attack

👉 Example:
“what kind of person dreams of this?”

👉 Technique:

• attacks the person, not the argument

👉 Goal:
➡️ emotional rejection

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t evaluate the claim

---

8️⃣ “People vs elite” narrative

👉 Example:
“they don’t dare to admit this to their own voters”

👉 Technique:

• leaders = dishonest
• “we” = honest

👉 Effect:
➡️ distrust toward all other actors

---

🧩 What is the strongest manipulation here?

👉 “they will send our sons to war”

This is:

• personal
• visual (you can imagine it)
• emotionally extreme

➡️ this carries the entire message

---

🧠 Why does it still work?

These messages don’t target facts, but:

• fear
• family instinct
• simple storytelling

And they mainly work on people who:

• don’t follow international politics closely
• seek security
• make decisions emotionally

---

⚖️ Quick reality check

• The EU does not have its own army
• Military involvement is decided by member states
• There is no concrete decision to “send EU troops”
• Ukraine is currently fighting a defensive war against Russia

---

🧠 Summary

This message is a classic:

👉 fear-based mobilization + protector narrative

It works through the formula:

“war is coming + your child is in danger + only we can protect you → vote for us”

A terrorist attack was thwarted near the Hungarian border!
This morning, powerful explosives and the devices needed to detonate them were found near the gas pipeline connecting Serbia and Hungary.

Whatever happens, we will protect our country’s peace and energy security. We will not allow anyone to influence or endanger the future of families, which is why Fidesz is the only safe choice!

Explosive material was found near the gas pipeline linking Hungary and Serbia. What do you think about this? It’s quite a frightening situation—this news and this information. It is reassuring that the Hungarian government had already strengthened protection around critical infrastructure, even militarily, weeks ago. But it also shows that there are still those who want to interfere in the Hungarian elections through our energy security. They want to break the free will of the Hungarian people and, in doing so, threaten low utility costs and affordable fuel and oil prices. On April 12, however, we will make sure this does not happen.

🧠 What is happening in this message?

👉 Main narrative

• “a terrorist attack was close” ⚠️
• “energy supply = a matter of survival”
• “external forces are interfering”
• “we will protect you”
• “→ therefore vote for us”

👉 Hidden formula:
fear + security + election
→ “if you don’t choose us → you will be in danger”

---

🔍 Influence techniques

1️⃣ Immediate shock and fear (shock framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“highly destructive explosives”
“a terrorist attack was thwarted”

👉 Technique:

• strong, dramatic wording at the beginning
• no detailed context (who, why, how)

👉 Goal:
➡️ trigger an immediate emotional reaction (fear)

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t analyze → you react

---

2️⃣ Critical infrastructure = life or death (existential framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“gas pipeline”, “energy security”

👉 Technique:

• everyday thing (gas) → elevated to survival issue
• implicit message: “if this fails → serious consequences”

👉 Goal:
➡️ amplify the perceived threat

👉 Effect:
➡️ you overestimate the danger

---

3️⃣ Vague external enemy (enemy framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“there are those who want to interfere”

👉 Technique:

• no specific perpetrator
• no evidence, no names

👉 Goal:
➡️ create a flexible enemy image

👉 Effect:
➡️ uncertainty + distrust

---

4️⃣ Election = security (false dilemma)

👉 Excerpt:
“therefore only Fidesz is the safe choice”

👉 Technique:

• reduces options to two:
  • them = safety
  • others = danger

👉 Goal:
➡️ simplify decision-making

👉 Effect:
➡️ you don’t decide based on programs or policies

---

5️⃣ “We will protect you” (protector framing)

👉 Excerpt:
“we will protect the peace of our country”

👉 Technique:

• government = protector
• citizens = passive, in need of protection

👉 Goal:
➡️ create dependency

👉 Effect:
➡️ “without them, we wouldn’t be safe”

---

6️⃣ Timing (timing manipulation)

👉 Excerpt:
“on April 12…”

👉 Technique:

• connects a current threat with an upcoming election

👉 Goal:
➡️ turn emotional response into voting behavior

👉 Effect:
➡️ you decide based on fear

---

7️⃣ False causality (false cause-effect)

👉 Implied logic:
“explosives were found → election interference → energy prices at risk”

👉 Problem:

• these links are not proven

👉 Effect:
➡️ a single event becomes a complete narrative

---

⚠️ About YOUR statement (important)

What you wrote:

• “they did it”
• “the Russians suggested it”
• “there is an official document”

👉 This can fall into the same trap as the propaganda:

• if there is no verifiable evidence, then:
  • it is also → an assumption / narrative
  • not a fact

👉 Key distinction:

✔️ “this may be propaganda” → analysis
❌ “they definitely did it” → unproven claim

---

🧾 Fact vs narrative

✔️ Possible fact:

• explosives were found (if confirmed by official sources)

❓ Not proven in the message:

• who placed them
• what the real intention was
• whether there was an actual attack plan
• whether it is connected to the election

👉 These are interpretations, not facts

---

🧠 Overall picture

This is a classic crisis + election propaganda pattern:

👉 event
→ amplification
→ enemy construction
→ promise of protection
→ voting direction

---

🎯 In short

This message:

• creates fear
• introduces a vague enemy
• offers a simple solution (“we will protect you”)
• and converts it into a voting choice