While we are giving a 30% discount on heating bills due to the extreme cold in January — on top of having the lowest energy prices in Europe — the Tisza Party’s in-house media is once again talking about abolishing utility price reductions.
We can send a message about this in the national petition too!
We will not allow Hungarians’ money to be spent on Ukraine and the war, and we will not allow energy prices to skyrocket because of it.
We can say it in any language we like — in Brussels and for Péter Magyar and his allies, only the clear will of the Hungarian people counts. 😉 Let’s all fill out the petition!
How many more ways do I have to say it?
Hungarians do not want to send money to Ukraine, they do not want to send money to the war, and they do not want their utility costs to increase because of the war.
Maybe this way they’ll finally understand it in Brussels too.
🔴 1️⃣ “We provide cheap energy” vs. “They would abolish it” — fear framing
The opening structure:
“We give discounts” ↔ “They would scrap the utility price cap”
This is classic loss-focused communication:
People fear losing something more than they value gaining something.
What’s not explained:
who exactly would abolish it,
when,
in what official program,
based on what numbers,
with what alternative.
Instead, the emotional formula is:
opponent comes to power → your bills go up
That’s one of the strongest voter triggers.
🧠 2️⃣ “Tisza’s in-house media” — delegitimization instead of evidence
Instead of quoting a concrete statement from the Tisza Párt or Magyar Péter, the message does this:
➡️ It sticks on a label: “in-house media”
This suggests:
not independent journalism
not opinion
but a propaganda machine
This is source poisoning: before you even hear anything, you’re told it’s not credible.
⚔️ 3️⃣ Energy prices → Ukraine → war — emotional chain-building
Watch the subconscious chain:
end of price caps ⬇ energy prices rise ⬇ because money goes to Ukraine ⬇ you are paying for the war
This is not a proven cause-and-effect sequence, but an emotional narrative. The goal is not economic debate, but this feeling:
“My money would be taken and given to others, while I’m worse off.”
Identity + loss + injustice = a very powerful mix.
🎭 4️⃣ “We can say it in any language” — Brussels as an external power
Here, “Brussels” is not a place, but a symbol:
European Union → a foreign center → not on the side of “the Hungarian people” → something that must be forced to accept Hungarian will
This is sovereignty framing:
We (the people) vs They (external elites)
At this point, it’s no longer policy debate — it’s an identity struggle.
🗳 5️⃣ “Let’s fill out the petition” — participation as loyalty
The petition here isn’t about gathering information, but:
✔️ reinforcing the camp ✔️ political mobilization ✔️ psychological commitment
Whoever fills it out has already chosen a side.
🔎 So what is this really?
This message isn’t trying to prove which energy policy is better. It implants this formula:
We protect → they would take away → you would pay → foreigners benefit
It works because it:
builds on fear
uses loss aversion
defines an external enemy
creates a moral frame (we are protectors, they are the threat)
That’s why it works emotionally even without detailed policy substance.
Kaja Kallas is working closely with von der Leyen on the so-called “Ukrainian Prosperity Plan.”
USD 1,500 billion in “Ukrainian prosperity”? From Hungarian taxpayers’ money? No thanks! That’s exactly why it’s important that as many people as possible fill out the national petition.
But who is Kaja, really? Well, she is, in one person, the Estonian version of Klára Dobrev and Péter Magyar.
Klára Dobrev—because her father, too, was a high-ranking Soviet communist. After the regime change, power was simply handed over: prime minister, EU commissioner—he was everything. So little Kaja just happened to land in the Estonian prime minister’s chair.
And she is also Estonia’s Péter Magyar, because she is Brussels’ best soldier. She was the most aggressive pro-war and pro-sanctions politician—until it turned out that her dear husband had been doing business with the Russians all along. That’s what a truly two-faced, lying Brussels politician looks like. After this, she fell, her party collapsed—but for her, things only got better! Because Brussels always looks after its own loyal people. After Kaja’s rampage, she became the EU’s foreign policy chief, firmly pro-Ukraine—and she still holds that post today.
Well, that’s why Péter Magyar is so relaxed. His only job is to carry out Brussels’ demands, and even if Hungarians were to kick him out quickly, he would still only “fail upward” in Brussels.
That’s how they are. That’s why we must stay on the Hungarian path, and that’s why Viktor Orbán and Fidesz are the safe choice!
Just look at what Kaja said. The European Commission is working on the Prosperity Plan, and Commission representatives are questioning ministers about it. Ukraine’s prosperity is very closely linked to Europe. So let’s take a look at who Kaja Kallas really is, the person now working with such force to ensure that Ukraine receives every possible form of support.
First of all, her father was a very high-ranking communist official under the Soviet Union, and afterward he spent his life more or less filling various party positions. So for little Kaja it really wasn’t very difficult growing up—and she ended up in quite a good place, as the prime minister of the Estonian liberals, where she remained in office until she fell very badly because of her husband, who traded with the Russians during the war.
And while she was delivering grand speeches in favor of massive sanctions, her husband was exposed in this affair. But according to the good old Brussels recipe, loyal Brussels soldiers are only ever promoted upward and are always rescued. That’s how Kaja Kallas eventually became the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs. She still sits in that position today.
And if anyone notices parallels between Péter Magyar and Kaja Kallas, that is no coincidence. They do the same thing: pro-Brussels figures lie left and right, and then try to escape along the Brussels route.
According to a former expert who has left the Tisza Party, he can back up his claims with documents and concrete evidence showing that Magyar Péter is misleading voters.
Csercsa Balázs, the former head of a party working group who has since defected, said in an interview on ATV that the Tisza Party is deliberately concealing its real intentions regarding tax increases and austerity measures. According to him, he can prove all this with facts and written documentation.
He claims that Tisza is preparing to introduce a multi-bracket personal income tax, increase the burden on small and medium-sized enterprises, and abolish family tax allowances. In addition, they would eliminate the 13th and 14th-month pensions and put an end to utility cost reductions. Although Magyar Péter denies all of this, his former colleague says the facts tell a different story.
According to Csercsa Balázs, agreements on these measures have already been made with Brussels. He stated that the vice president of the Tisza Party, Tarr Zoltán, personally negotiated with the European People’s Party on the fulfillment of these commitments. He claims that Tarr later said the real plans could not be made public “because then they would lose.”
The speaker believes Hungarian voters deserve more and have every right to expect honest communication. In his view, it has become clear that Magyar Péter is not acting in the interests of either the country or his own supporters. According to him, no matter how hard the Tisza Party tries to cover up the truth, it will eventually come to light.
The stakes of the April election are therefore clear: on one side stands a “Brussels path” involving austerity and the deception of voters; on the other, a national course based on open speech and the representation of Hungarian interests.
There is this certain Csercsa Balázs—you know, the former Tisza insider who has now started airing the party’s dirty laundry. It is obvious that Magyar Péter is very nervous, because what has been circulating in Hungarian public discourse for months is now being confirmed from the inside: namely, that Tisza has an austerity package prepared for the event that they win the elections.
That package includes everything from cutting pensions, taxing small businesses, to squeezing families. I won’t list it all, because not everyone has seen it. This former Tisza member now says in an interview that he has facts and documents to support what he is claiming.
So while Magyar Péter is trying to deny and deflect these accusations, this former insider says he has actual evidence. He also spoke in the interview about Tarr Zoltán—you remember him, the one who said “we can’t tell everything, because then we’d lose.” That statement now makes sense in light of what he meant.
According to him, Tarr Zoltán personally reached an agreement with Brussels on what demands would be made if they win, and which demands the Tisza Party would obediently carry out. So the real question of this election is whether those austerity measures—implemented at Brussels’ request and instruction—will come, or whether Hungary stays on its own path and continues to protect Hungarian families. That is what is truly at stake.
🎭 1️⃣ The “defector insider” as a credibility trick
The backbone of the story is not what is being claimed, but who is claiming it:
“former Tisza member” “workgroup leader” “has documents”
This technique is called the insider witness authority effect.
In the audience’s mind, the chain runs automatically:
insider → must know something → therefore it could be true
But:
we don’t see any documents
no concrete text is quoted
no verifiable details
only a promise of evidence
This is the evidence-without-evidence effect. A very common political genre.
🧠 2️⃣ The deliberate construction of a fear package
Look at what the accusation list is built from:
Topic
Why it’s effective
progressive income tax
“you’ll pay more”
higher burdens on SMEs
“small businesses will collapse”
end of family tax benefits
“families are under attack”
end of 13th–14th month pensions
“the elderly are targeted”
end of utility price cuts
“life will get more expensive”
This is not a policy debate. It’s an:
➡️ existential threat package
The core message is:
“If this happens, YOU will live worse.”
In this state, people don’t compare programs — they try to avoid loss.
🔗 3️⃣ Brussels as the invisible commander
The key narrative phrases are:
“agreement with Brussels” “commitments toward the European People’s Party”
This is a sovereignty frame.
The point isn’t whether the program is real, but this:
they wouldn’t decide → they’d be directed from outside
Emotionally, this translates into:
👉 “it wouldn’t be a Hungarian government” 👉 “foreign interests” 👉 “they would execute orders”
This is an identity-level trigger, not an economic debate.
🎯 4️⃣ The psychology of the strongest sentence
“We can’t say everything, because we’d lose.”
This is a brilliantly functioning propaganda element because it combines:
suggestion
secrecy
conspiracy
and sounds like a confession
Evidence? None. But the feeling is: “something has been exposed.”
The brain fills in the blanks.
🧩 5️⃣ The two-path narrative (good world vs bad world)
At the end comes the classic black-and-white closure:
Side A
Side B
Brussels
Hungarian path
austerity
protection
secrecy
honesty
foreign interests
national interests
This turns the vote into a moral choice.
You’re not deciding which economic model is better — but “whose side you’re on.”
🔎 What’s missing from the story?
What would be needed professionally, but isn’t there:
concrete documents
dates
quotes
official draft
cost calculations
publicly available program sections
Instead, we only get:
“according to him” “he said” “an agreement was made”
This is rumor format, not proof.
🧠 In summary, what is this at a communication level?
This is a high-efficiency electoral fear narrative that:
✔ imitates insider credibility ✔ triggers fear of personal loss ✔ creates a sense of external control ✔ paints the picture of a hidden plan ✔ forces a moral side choice
That’s why it’s powerful — not because it’s detailed, but because it’s emotionally targeted.
Thank you for the many thoughtful, useful ideas and suggestions! Let’s get North Pest moving! The red mailbox will remain on the main square in Újpalota until Sunday.
Let’s see what’s inside. Well… we received some dog feces again — we’ll throw that out right away. Once again we’re at the now world-famous red mailbox on the main square in Újpalota. Better be careful, because who knows what these “funny” Tisza hate-stirrers have come up with. Friday afternoon collection.
In the 15th district, we’d like more pedestrian crossings. And more, and more, and more. Dear Balázs, please replace the old No. 69 trams and solve the parking situation. Thank you very much.
Oh, we even got a sandwich. That’ll go in the trash too. What do you think about it? Well… someone literally crapped in it. Honestly, this doesn’t even surprise me anymore. The hate is there — you can see it.
Anyway. We also received 100 forints from someone. We’re taking it as a lucky coin. The box will stay here until Sunday evening — messages are welcome.
🎭 1️⃣ The “dog poop” scene is not information — it’s dramaturgy
This isn’t about what was actually in the box. It’s a political stage device.
Its function:
It triggers disgust 🤢
The disgust gets linked to a political group → “Tisza”, “hatemongers”
This creates a subconscious formula: opponent = dirty / uncivilized / destructive
This is a classic soft form of dehumanization.
It doesn’t argue. It degrades.
🧠 2️⃣ The opponent = hatred
Look at the sentence structure:
“funny Tisza hatemongers” “there is hatred”
This is moral framing:
Us
Them
we work
they hate
we collect ideas
they litter
order
filth
This is not a policy debate. This is building a moral hierarchy.
🎬 3️⃣ The mailbox show = reality politics
The “let’s see what’s inside” format:
reliably creates surprise
has a folk-tale / street vibe
gives the illusion of “the people’s voice”
But the focus isn’t crosswalks, parking, or trams — it’s the incident.
👉 Conflict spreads better than ideas.
🧩 4️⃣ What happens psychologically in the viewer
Laughter or shock
Disgust
Disgust tied to a political label
Moral distancing from the “other side”
This is emotional conditioning, not information.
⚖️ 5️⃣ The core trick
On the surface the video is about:
“citizen suggestions”
In reality it’s about:
“look what kind of people the other side are”
The deep structure of the message:
what matters is not what they say → but who they are
If the opponent is seen as “filthy,” their arguments become automatically worthless.
🔎 In summary
This is theatrical moral contrast-building:
✔️ us = order, community, work ❌ them = filth, hatred, destruction
And all of this is sold through a visual, shareable scene.
Everyone would be worse off with Tisza — even those who blindly follow Péter Magyar right now.
Dear Tisza supporters, I’m speaking to you in this video. I know many of you will instinctively stop it or scroll past, but it’s worth listening.
Here is Balázs Csercsa, a former mid-level leader who left Tisza, clearly and understandably explaining that this party is lying to everyone. The party’s real goals differ from what they communicate publicly. What they say outwardly is not what they are actually planning. This is also what Tar Zoltán talked about.
They want to win the election, and basically anything is acceptable to achieve that. They are preparing for austerity measures. Balázs Csercsa talks about this too. For example, a multi-tier tax system is practically not even a question inside the Tisza party — internally, it’s considered necessary and good. What many people don’t understand is why they can’t openly admit this.
We don’t expect anyone — I certainly don’t — to suddenly like the Prime Minister or the governing parties. But at least don’t be your own enemy — or the enemy of your own wallet, your children, and your grandchildren.
With Tisza, everyone would lose — including those who currently consider themselves Tisza supporters.
🎭 What is this really? – A quick breakdown
1️⃣ “Everyone loses with Tisza” – an absolute claim with no evidence
This is a total verdict, not an analysis. There is no:
specific decision,
adopted program,
voted law,
budgetary figure.
👉 Function: to shut down thinking right at the start.
2️⃣ “Dear Tisza supporters” – pseudo-dialogue
It pretends to start a conversation, but immediately adds:
“you’ll probably just scroll past anyway”
👉 This pre-emptively discredits the people being addressed. A classic “you wouldn’t understand anyway” framing.
3️⃣ A former insider = the keeper of truth
The names Csercsa Balázs and Tar Zoltán are dropped instead of evidence.
The logic:
left the party → became disillusioned → therefore tells the truth
👉 This is authority substitution, not proof. We never hear:
when,
which document,
which concrete decision they are talking about.
4️⃣ “They say one thing publicly and plan something else” – attribution of intent
This statement is not verifiable.
There is no:
internal minutes,
adopted program,
congress decision.
👉 This is mind-reading dressed up as politics.
5️⃣ Austerity + progressive taxation = fear bundle
Here, “progressive taxation” is not policy discussion, but a trigger word.
No one says:
where,
with what tax brackets,
applied to whom,
with what compensation.
👉 One word = a full existential threat.
6️⃣ “Your wallet, your children, your grandchildren” – moral blackmail
At this point, it’s no longer a debate but moral pressure:
if you think differently → you are irresponsible → you harm your family
👉 Classic voter guilt-tripping.
🧠 Overall picture
This text is:
❌ not a program critique ❌ not fact-based analysis ❌ not accountability
But rather:
✔️ fear framing ✔️ reliance on “former insider” testimony ✔️ invention of future intentions ✔️ “if you’re not with us, you’re against yourself” logic
Here’s the big team! In Budapest too, Fidesz is the safe choice!
The poster board featuring the 16 Fidesz–KDNP parliamentary candidates from the capital has been completed with their photos. These are now the official campaign pictures. Here is North Pest.
People in North Pest can count on them, because we won’t go to war, we won’t send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine, and we won’t allow energy prices to skyrocket due to Europe’s war hysteria.
🎭 1️⃣ “Here’s the big team!” – a show of strength, not information
This is not a substantive claim, but psychological positioning.
The message under the surface: 👉 they are many 👉 they are organized 👉 they are ready
This taps into the instinct to side with the winner (the bandwagon effect). People tend to gravitate toward whoever appears strong.
This is not a program. It’s visual authority-building.
🧠 3️⃣ “People of North Pest can count on them” – adopting the protector role
This is the classic:
we are watching over you
It does not say:
exactly what they have done for North Pest
what development took place
what decisions were made
It only provides an emotional reassurance: “we’ll be there when trouble comes.”
⚔️ 4️⃣ The central weapon: a package of war-related fears
Three stacked fears:
Claim
Actual concrete decision?
Or emotional image?
“we won’t go to war”
no such Hungarian decision on the agenda
existential fear
“we won’t send Hungarians’ money to Ukraine”
complex, EU-level financial mechanisms
“they’ll take your money” feeling
“energy prices will skyrocket”
global markets + politics
utility-bill panic
👉 This is not a policy debate, but the activation of survival instincts.
🧩 5️⃣ What’s MISSING? (This is key)
Not a word about:
transport
housing
hospitals
schools
the local economy
inflation
In other words: This is not about North Pest, but about a global war narrative.
The local candidates function mainly as background props.
🎯 Summing up the trick
The text works like this:
Team = strength
Photos = legitimacy
We protect you
If not us → war + loss of money + energy disaster
This is defensive psychology, not a presentation of a political program.
If you’d like, I can show how the same topic could be communicated factually, without fear-based framing — and you’ll see how much shorter it would be.
“Slava Ukraini,” said Tisza’s foreign minister candidate. 🇺🇦 Anita Orbán. Tisza’s foreign minister candidate previously co-signed a GLOBSEC document together with Gordon Bajnai in which they literally wrote that “Ukraine’s reconstruction must form an integral part of European integration. GLORY TO UKRAINE!”
♾️ Anita Orbán and the entire left wing are jointly working to carry out orders from Brussels. Under the leadership of Péter Magyar, they would install a puppet government on our necks and place Hungary into war service.
No matter how they try to deny their pro-war position, Hungarians see through Tisza. Everyone clearly sees the difference between the Brussels path and the Hungarian path.
If we stay on the Hungarian path, we will continue to send neither money, nor soldiers, nor weapons into this meaningless war.
📝 We say NO to financing the war, which is why we are launching a national petition! 🇭🇺 As long as Hungary has a national government, we will resist all war efforts, stand by peace and Hungarian interests — that is why Fidesz is the safe choice! 🇭🇺
🔴 1️⃣ Turning one sentence into “proof of being pro-war”
“Slava Ukraini”
By itself, this is:
a Ukrainian national greeting
not a statement supporting military intervention
not support for sending weapons
not support for sending Hungarian soldiers
👉 But the text frames it like this: greeting → ideological loyalty → commitment to war
That’s a logical leap, not evidence.
🧠 2️⃣ A policy document distorted into a war plan
From the GLOBSEC document:
“Ukraine’s reconstruction should form an integral part of European integration.”
This is:
a diplomatic / economic / institutional issue
thinking about a post-war situation
But the post presents it as: EU integration = war bloc = orders from Brussels
👉 A civilizational/political decision (EU integration perspective) is being turned into a military threat.
🎭 3️⃣ “Puppet government” – destroying legitimacy in advance
“They would put a puppet government on our necks.”
This is a key element.
It doesn’t say:
different foreign policy
different diplomacy
different alliance strategy
Instead it says: 👉 they aren’t independent actors at all 👉 they are controlled by outside forces
This is delegitimization. If someone is a puppet, you don’t have to debate them.
⚔️ 4️⃣ The most important distortion
The text blends together:
Thing
Presented as the same
Solidarity with Ukraine
Support for EU integration
Diplomatic stance
Humanitarian aid
= financing the war
= sending weapons
= sending Hungarian soldiers
👉 These are different decision levels, but here they’re fused into one single “pro-war package.”
That’s an emotional short circuit.
🧨 5️⃣ Fear trigger: “They would put Hungary into war service”
This is the strongest line.
This is no longer normal politics, but an existential threat narrative:
they’ll take your son
they’ll drag the country into war
they’ll sacrifice Hungary
👉 There’s no evidence, but the emotional impact is huge.
🧱 6️⃣ False dilemma
The final frame:
Hungarian path
Brussels path
peace
war
national interest
foreign orders
independence
puppet government
security
weapons
In reality, foreign policy is a spectrum, not two buttons.
🎯 What’s the goal?
Not information. Not policy discussion.
But:
To turn fear of war into political loyalty.
If you’re not with them → you bring war.
That’s identity politics, not debate.
In short:
This text is not about what Tisza would actually do — it’s about making voters afraid of what would supposedly happen if Fidesz doesn’t remain in power.
And are we supposed to die for them and give them all our money? Former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba is praying for a change of government in Hungary, because they expect a pro-Ukrainian government from the Tisza party.
We can see that the Ukrainians have entered the election campaign. But we will not allow Hungarian money to be sent to Ukraine, and we will not let them drag us into the war.
We are working for peace and to ensure that, after April as well, the country has a Hungary-first government. Let’s not take risks — only Fidesz is the safe choice!
Dmytro Kuleba, the former Ukrainian foreign minister, is very much praying for Viktor Orbán to be defeated, because then a pro-Ukrainian government could come to power. Now everyone is going around asking whether Orbán will answer the following question. We know exactly what they want, but we do not want that, because we know what a pro-Ukrainian government would mean for Hungary and for Hungarian families.
It would mean that Hungarian money — the money of Hungarian families — could be sent to Ukraine, and that Hungary could even be drawn into the war. This is, unfortunately, a realistic scenario in such a case.
That is why I say that we are working for Viktor Orbán to win. And those who pray should pray for this: that a Hungarian government remains in place that puts the interests of Hungarians first.
🔴 1️⃣ “Should we die for them?” – an instant fear button
This opening is not a real question, but a panic-triggering frame.
It does not talk about:
what specific decision is being discussed
what actual military obligation would exist
what Hungary’s legal position is
Instead, it jumps straight to:
➡️ you ➡️ your family ➡️ death ➡️ war
This is a classic existential threat framing. Once people feel fear, they don’t analyze — they want to defend themselves.
🧠 2️⃣ Bringing an external enemy into a Hungarian election
Mentioning Dmitro Kuleba here is not information, but a symbolic tool.
The logic goes like this:
Ukrainian politician → prays for a change of government ⬇ Tisza = pro-Ukrainian ⬇ pro-Ukrainian = against Hungary’s interests ⬇ whoever is not Fidesz = serving foreign interests
This turns the election into a loyalty test, not a political debate.
The question is no longer:
“Which economic policy is better?”
But:
“Are you Hungarian, or are you serving foreign interests?”
This is identity politics, not policy.
⚔️ 3️⃣ “They will drag us into the war” – sense of loss of control
A key word here is “drag”.
It suggests:
you have no decision
you have no sovereignty
outside forces are in control
This is psychologically powerful, because people’s biggest fears include:
losing control
war
their children’s future
The text bundles all of these together.
💰 4️⃣ “Hungarians’ money will go to Ukraine” – simplified financial scare
Again, there is no:
amount
budget line
EU mechanism
form of support
Only the feeling:
👉 “it will be taken from you” 👉 “it will be given to someone else”
This relies on zero-sum thinking: if they get something → you lose.
🕊️ 5️⃣ “We work for peace” – claiming the moral high ground
Here comes one of the strongest rhetorical tricks:
It doesn’t say:
“this is how we see the strategy”
Instead it says:
we = peace others = war
This creates a moral dichotomy:
with us → peace-loving, good person against us → pro-war, dangerous
This shuts down meaningful debate.
🎯 6️⃣ The final goal: not to persuade, but to close the mind
The closing line:
“Let’s not take risks, only Fidesz is the safe choice”
This is a safety vs. risk frame.
Not:
program vs. program
data vs. data
But:
Fidesz = safety
everything else = danger
This is aimed at uncertain voters who are afraid of change.
🧩 In summary, what propaganda elements appear here?
Element
Function
“we would die for them”
existential fear
bringing in a Ukrainian politician
external enemy
“drag us into war”
loss of control
“our money goes to Ukraine”
financial threat
“we want peace”
moral superiority
“only Fidesz is safe”
safety–risk framing
This text is not about the real situation regarding Ukraine, but about closing thinking along:
“You should have been standing there too — unfortunately you were born too late.”
This is what a TISZA supporter wrote in a comment to my fellow representative Béla Radics, under his post marking Holocaust Remembrance Day, in which he commemorated the Jews who were shot into the Danube.
Is this the TISZA’s so-called “country of love”?!
Writing something like this to anyone is completely unacceptable. We firmly reject comments like this.
Instead of hatred, together with the national government we choose respect for Hungarians and the preservation of peace.
I want to show you the comment that I believe I came across yesterday on the page of my fellow representative Béla Radics. Ah — here it is.
This particular TISZA commenter wrote this under a photo posted by Béla Radics, where he shared an image of the Shoes on the Danube Bank on Holocaust Remembrance Day — a memorial that symbolizes how countless Jewish people were tragically shot into the Danube.
And under this image, the commenter wrote: “You should have been standing there too — unfortunately you were born too late.”
So this is the TISZA “country of love”: writing under someone’s post — whether they are a representative or not, it doesn’t matter, a human being is a human being — that they too should have been standing there so they could be shot into the Danube.
Well then, this is what the TISZA “country of love” looks like.
🔴 1️⃣ It builds on real outrage – but uses it as a political weapon
The comment being quoted is genuinely unacceptable. Holocaust Memorial Day + the symbol of Jews shot into the Danube + “you should have been standing there too” → this is violence-referencing, dehumanizing speech.
The natural reaction to this is: ➡️ disgust ➡️ moral outrage ➡️ rejection
However, a distortion happens here:
The words of one anonymous commenter ➡️ are reframed ➡️ into a moral characterization of an entire political community.
🧠 2️⃣ One person = the whole camp (collective guilt)
Key sentence:
“Is this the TISZA ‘country of love’?”
The logical step that is never said out loud, but is implied:
one commenter → “TISZA supporter” “TISZA supporter” → TISZA community TISZA community → “these kinds of people”
This is a basic propaganda operation: one extreme voice → moral judgment of an entire political side
The same pattern has worked before with:
one protester’s sign
one activist’s sentence
one slip of the tongue
➡️ “See? That’s what they’re like.”
🎯 3️⃣ The issue is no longer about the Holocaust
Notice the shift:
Original topic: Holocaust memorial day, victims shot into the Danube
Reframed topic: The moral corruption of TISZA vs “us”
Here, the Holocaust is no longer historical remembrance, but:
👉 a moral backdrop 👉 an emotional amplifier 👉 a tool of political legitimation
This is especially powerful because:
the topic is sacred and sensitive by nature
anyone placed on the “wrong side” in this context is morally discredited immediately
🟠 4️⃣ “We” = peace, respect, the nation
The closing move is typical:
“Instead of hatred, we choose peace and respect for Hungarians.”
So the formula becomes:
They
We
hatred
peace
death-referencing speech
respect
moral corruption
national government
This is a moral black-and-white world. There is no:
❌ “Shell Kapitány” gave a long interview, but don’t waste your time on it! Because he says exactly the same things we’ve heard from any left-liberal politician over the past 30 years.
🗣 This is the classic “Hi, how are you, I’m a hotshot manager, I know everything better and I’ll save you simple Hungarians” mentality.
According to him, Hungarians don’t need an airport, strategically important industries, or major investments either. What a surprise! Globalist big capital swore revenge on Hungarians precisely because the national government bought back key sectors that the left had sold off.
👤 He follows the old leftist principle of “let’s dare to be small”—and whatever money there is should be burned away and scattered on welfare payments.
And of course, Hungarians shouldn’t aspire to any major role or mission either. We should keep our mouths shut, obey Brussels, and tie ourselves forever to some unified, large federal Europe.
👉 “Let’s return to Europe,” said “Shell Kapitány.” First of all, we never went anywhere—Europe turned away from itself. Second, where exactly should we return to? Brussels? And what do they offer there? Economic death, loans, debt, and war.
Thanks, but no thanks!
💭 This is the servile way of thinking that has characterized the foreign-directed left in Hungary since the regime change. This mindset led our country to total bankruptcy by 2010. Hungarians said no to this, and since then we have been building a strong national Hungary together.
Straying from this path would be a historic mistake. Multinationals and banks would flood back in, they would loot Hungarians, and by chaining our country to Brussels, this would become permanent.
🟠 All it takes is one wrong X in April. That’s why Fidesz is the safe choice!
Yesterday, “Sárkapitány” gave a fairly long, eight-page interview. To spare you from suffering through it, let me summarize the essence. He came with the “Hi, how are you? I’m the American businessman, and I’ll tell you how things should be done in Hungary” attitude throughout. He said we must return to Europe—as if we had ever left the path Europe originally stood on. In reality, Europe moved in a direction where we remained where Europe originally was.
He also said we should introduce the euro—we all know what that would mean. These are the same lines we’ve heard from every so-called expert, manager, government figure, or candidate over the years. They’ve all tried the same thing.
The real point is simply this: to abandon the sovereign Hungarian path represented by the Hungarian government over the past years—over the past decade and a half—and to pull us back into the globalist Brussels mold from which we finally managed to break free, while much of Europe continues to suffer within it.
That’s where “Sárkapitány” would like to steer us again, back onto this supposedly “good” Brussels, European path, whose outcome we already know: the big multinationals come in, and instead of the Hungarian people, the multinationals enjoy the benefits. This is something we absolutely do not want to experience again—because we already did before 2010.
He also floated another idea: pushing the Hungarian economy back toward welfare dependency. We fought very hard to bring one million people into the labor market, to restore the dignity of work. We do not want to return to a path where work has no value and everyone believes they can live off benefits. We can see where this has led in Western Europe and what tensions it has created.
So let’s not deviate from the path we’ve walked for the past decade and a half—a path that has meant Hungary and the Hungarian people have their own voice, their own say, and that Hungarian politics is about us, not about foreign capital.
🎭 1️⃣ Character assassination INSTEAD of substantive debate
What we don’t hear:
what he actually said in the interview
which of his claims are wrong and why
which numbers, models, or consequences are debatable
Instead, we get this:
“Hi, how are you, I’m a hotshot manager, I’ll tell you simple Hungarians how things work.”
👉 This is class-enemy framing. Not a professional disagreement → but a condescending, foreign, arrogant figure.
Goal: make the audience not even want to hear his arguments. This is pre-emptive delegitimization.
🌍 2️⃣ “Globalist big capital swore revenge” – conspiracy framing
This is no longer politics — it’s mythology.
Structure of the claim:
there is a vague, faceless force (“globalist big capital”)
it seeks revenge
Hungary is the target
Missing:
names
decision-making mechanisms
economic processes
institutional levels
👉 This is a conspiratorial narrative driven by emotional logic, not evidence.
