❗ We are also the party of pension increases.
We have formed an alliance with pensioners and committed ourselves to preserving the real value of pensions.
What’s more, we reinstated the 13th- and 14th-month pensions, which Brussels and the left-wing economists who write the Tisza party’s program would take away at the very first opportunity.
🧡 Seniors can count on us, which is why, for them too, the safe choice is Fidesz.
🙄 I see that Telex has already rather deftly jumped on Orbán’s remarks today in Miskolc about young people. So let’s clarify a few things.
The problem with young people is not that they are not Fidesz supporters. Let’s be honest: as a young person—by which I mean the 18–25 age group—people rarely articulate a clear party-political position. This is precisely why the opposition mainstream in Hungary today, which is constantly forced to replace its “messiah,” finds itself in a difficult situation. A significant part of their voter base consists of young people who do not vote for them out of sympathy or a firm political worldview, but because rebellion is fashionable.
Four years ago Márki-Zay was the trendy figure, before that Momentum, now it’s Magyar. But this is not about “party loyalty” or well-defined positions; it’s about trends. And that, in reality, is the problem. This is what the prime minister was trying to draw attention to today.
Young people should not be raised to “become Fidesz supporters,” but to learn how to think in complex ways, to acquire independent thinking, and to be able to interpret connections, geopolitical situations, and realities. They should learn what directions, ideas, and situations exist in the world. And teaching this is, indeed, the responsibility of parents.
It is the parents’ task to teach their children how to live in reality. To help them recognize that everything they see in the virtual world is not reality itself—at best, it is only a fragment of it. It is the parents’ responsibility to teach, for example, that just because young people in Hungary do not yet feel on their own skin that there is a war next door, this does not mean there is no war, nor does it guarantee that they will not feel its effects personally in the near future.
Since the coronavirus pandemic, a significant portion of young people have fled from reality into social media. At the time, that really did seem like a better place: there were no lockdowns, no illness, no death—only what the algorithm served them according to their own tastes. This has gone so far that even today many have not returned to reality from there. And this is a huge problem.
Because social media simplifies reality, artificial intelligence removes the necessity for complex thinking, and it “produces” people who believe that things like European Union leaders doing everything in their power to prevent two warring parties from making peace do not affect them—and cannot affect them. Yet in reality, this affects them now. And not just a little.
So Telex simplifies and distorts. No—Orbán is not asking parents to raise their children to be Fidesz supporters. Orbán is simply suggesting that parents should not entrust their children to social media, but should talk with them, think together with them, and try together to understand the world, so that these young people can grow into adults who are viable in the real world and capable of complex thinking.
I know this is longer than a Telex headline, but let’s not spare ourselves the effort of thinking. And then there will be no problem.
The text is not an explanation, not a pedagogical debate, and not media criticism. It is a finely packaged political legitimation speech that employs several layered propaganda techniques. Let’s examine it layer by layer.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The purpose of the statement is not to understand the situation of young people, but to:
👉 The unspoken final conclusion:
If a young person “thinks the wrong way,” it is not the political system that is at fault, but the parents and social media.
“Orbán did not say that young people should be Fidesz supporters…”
🔹 Technique: strawman argument
🔹 How it works:
👉 As a result, the real question disappears:
Who decides what counts as ‘correct’ complex thinking?
“Young people don’t vote out of party loyalty, but because rebelling is trendy.”
🔹 Technique: generational devaluation
🔹 Effect:
👉 This is a classic authoritarian narrative:
“They don’t understand the world yet – we understand it for them.”
🔹 The term remains undefined:
👉 In reality:
“Complex” = whatever aligns with the government narrative.
“This is the parents’ responsibility.”
🔹 Technique: responsibility outsourcing
🔹 Effect:
👉 This is moral pressure, not educational advice.
🔹 Technique: technological demonization
🔹 How it works:
👉 Classic logic:
The problem is not the message, but where you hear it.
“EU leaders are working against peace.”
🔹 Technique: axiom without evidence
🔹 Effect:
🔹 Technique: media delegitimization
🔹 How it works:
This text is:
👉 Its message, simplified:
Don’t question the state, don’t challenge the media, don’t criticize power – instead, re-educate your child at home.
This is not pedagogy, but delayed propaganda, which speaks the language of “thinking” while defining exactly what counts as an acceptable thought – ultimately within Orbán Viktor’s interpretive framework.
It’s truly unbelievable that not even a Sunday afternoon can go by without Magyar Péter getting exposed for yet another lie. This time, what happened was that he flooded social media with claims that his candidate in Vác had been attacked by Orbán’s henchmen — violent Fidesz supporters, these disgusting people who believe only in violence and who have now even resorted to physical force against his candidates.
And then this very candidate from Vác was forced to give a police witness statement, where he said that no physical assault had occurred, no one shouted at him, no one harmed him in any way. Quite simply, the entire story was a fabrication and a lie on the part of Magyar Péter.
So now I ask you: what do you think a notorious liar would be like if he were to end up in a head-of-state position? Let me say it again: Magyar Péter is a pathological liar. You can barely believe anything he says anymore — practically not even that the sky is blue or the grass is green. And honestly, this is almost literally what we’re talking about now.
Do you still believe anything at all this man says?
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The statement is not an attempt at fact-finding, but rather:
👉 The conclusion is fixed in advance:
“Péter Magyar lies, therefore he is unfit.”
Every subsequent sentence is merely an after-the-fact justification of this premise.
🔹 Technique: preemptive verdict
🔹 How it works:
👉 Classic propaganda principle:
“Judge first, explain later.”
“Orbán’s janissaries,” “disgusting people,” “they only believe in violence”
🔹 Technique: demonization + dehumanization
🔹 Effect:
👉 What matters is not what happened, but what emotion is triggered.
“This whole story was a fabrication”
🔹 Technique: generalization from a single case
🔹 Trick:
👉 Logical fallacy:
single claim → permanent trait
“incorrigible liar,” “you can’t believe a word he says anymore…”
🔹 Technique: stigmatizing repetition
🔹 Effect:
👉 This is communicative execution, not debate.
🔹 Technique: hypothetical catastrophe
🔹 How it works:
👉 Classic authoritarian framing:
“You don’t want this either, do you?”
“Do you still believe anything this man says?”
🔹 Technique: loyalty test
🔹 Effect:
👉 It does not ask for an opinion; it demands side-taking.
🧠 One-sentence summary
This text does not seek truth, but rather:
a politically manufactured verdict produced through emotional destruction,
where facts serve only as props,
and the goal is total delegitimization.
❌ It makes a difference whether someone breaks down your door or knocks and asks if they may come in.
Let’s not confuse illegal migrants with guest workers, who come to Hungary with permits and under strict regulations.
In Western Europe, migrants have poured in and public safety has visibly deteriorated, while here guest workers do not cause such problems.
❗Hungary will remain a migrant-free country! ❗
Dear questioner, you are asking me—or requesting clarification—when we talk about illegal migration, presumably in connection with why there are Indian and Filipino guest workers here. The answer is quite simple: we must not confuse illegal migrants with guest workers who arrive with all the necessary permits. They come here in a very strictly regulated manner.
The difference is exactly the same as between someone breaking down your door and someone knocking and asking whether they may come in. That is the entire difference. The situation is that people who are currently working in Hungary as guest workers can receive a work permit for two—exactly two—years, which can then be extended in certain cases. Moreover, they go through all kinds of legal procedures in order to be able to work here.
By contrast, look at what is happening in Western Europe. There, migrants have poured in without questions being asked and without any prior legal procedures, and then they spread their arms and expect the host country to provide a full support system: healthcare, expenses for their children, and various other social benefits—essentially even cash handouts instead of wages. And one can easily imagine what effect this has on a country’s economy.
This is precisely what we do not want to try. So those who come here because they want to work, and for whom—based on the data—the government sees a need for that type of labor, are allowed in, because it benefits us. But not in unlimited numbers and not without questions, as in Western Europe.
And I would suggest one more thing: look at whether the guest workers who are here cause any problems at all for Hungarian public safety or Hungarian society. And then look at the same question in Western Europe.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The statement is not meant to inform, but to:
👉 The conclusion is predetermined:
Hungary = order and security / Western Europe = chaos.
“It matters whether someone breaks down your door or knocks and asks to come in.”
🔹 Technique: criminalizing metaphor
🔹 How it works:
🔹 The problem:
This is an emotional image, not a legal or social description. Migration is not a private home, but a matter of state legal processes.
🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Claim:
🔹 What disappears from the picture:
👉 Reality is far more nuanced, but nuance disrupts propaganda.
“They flooded in without questions or procedures.”
🔹 Technique: threat stacking + generalization
🔹 Effect:
👉 A classic “look how bad it is over there” argument—without evidence.
“Do they cause any problems?”
🔹 Technique: shifting the burden of proof
🔹 Trick:
👉 The audience is expected to feel that there is a problem—this is not proof.
🔹 Narrative:
🔹 Unspoken facts:
👉 This is economic migration, just under a different label.
“Look at here… look at Western Europe…”
🔹 Technique: moral comparison
🔹 Message:
👉 This is not a debate, but an identity test.
This text is not about migration, but about
who is afraid, who is obedient, and who accepts the government’s exclusive claim to truth.
Sir Richard Knighton, the British Chief of the Defence Staff, says that the nation’s “sons and daughters” must be ready to fight (…) and that more families will come to understand what sacrifice means.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte says: “A war is coming like the one our grandfathers and great-grandfathers lived through.”
French Chief of the Defence Staff Fabien Mandon says: “We must accept the loss of our children.”
Polish left-wing Prime Minister Donald Tusk says: “This is our war.”
No. No. And no.
We will not give either our lives or our money for Ukraine.
Europe is burning with war fever, dragging along even countries larger than ours. We can stay out of this madness only if we have a strong, anti-war, experienced prime minister and a national government. That is why Fidesz and Viktor Orbán are the safe choice.
And I read with shock the news built around the words of the British Chief of the Defence Staff, the French Chief of the Defence Staff, or the NATO Secretary General — all of them saying that we must accept that this war will have human losses, that wars like this were last seen by our great-grandfathers and great-great-grandfathers, and that everyone must make sacrifices.
So I simply do not understand whether these people truly have no idea what they are playing with, or whether they are this heartless, or this greedy for money — because there are always major economic interests involved in war as well. A lot of money goes into a war like this. And somewhere, someone profits from it.
The purpose of this statement is not a factual interpretation of the war in Ukraine, but rather:
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end, but decided in the very first paragraph:
Fidesz = life, peace / Others = death, war.
The list appears “factual,” but in reality it forms an authoritarian chain of argumentation:
🔹 Technique: authority stacking
🔹 Trick:
– quotes taken out of context
– no clarity on who they apply to or under which scenario
– “war” is presented as an inevitable natural disaster
👉 Effect: the audience does not deliberate; it panics.
“we must accept the loss of our children”
🔹 Technique: moral shock
🔹 Effect:
– rational debate becomes impossible
– anyone who disagrees is labeled “pro-child-death”
👉 This is the most powerful propaganda tool:
it cannot be answered without appearing inhuman.
“We will not give either our lives or our money for Ukraine!”
🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Fabricated choice:
A) total war, child sacrifice
B) Fidesz, Orbán, peace
❌ All intermediate options disappear:
👉 Reality is reduced to: Orbán or death.
“there is always someone who profits from war”
🔹 Technique: insinuation without evidence
🔹 Effect:
– all policy arguments appear corrupt by default
– the “pro-war” side is framed as morally depraved
👉 This absolves the speaker’s own side from addressing any substantive questions.
“That is why Fidesz and Viktor Orbán are the safe choice!”
🔹 Technique: authoritarian closure
🔹 Operation:
– no weighing of options
– no debate
– the decision becomes a moral obligation
Politics here is no longer a choice, but a loyalty oath:
This text is:
but fear-based loyalty manufacturing.
👉 Its simplified message:
“If you don’t vote for us, your children will die.”
This is not argumentation.
This is psychological coercion.
Sunday pancake-making, and in the meantime some particularly good news.
Because Viktor Orbán has received a letter — and not from just anyone, but from Donald Trump himself. The letter is about Donald Trump forming a peace council, and in this peace council he is inviting the Hungarian prime minister not just to any position, but essentially as a representative of the founding countries.
The purpose of this peace council is to bring together world leaders who will work jointly for peace, and I think nothing illustrates better how important Viktor Orbán’s efforts for peace have been in recent years than this. The world’s most powerful leader, Donald Trump, clearly evaluated this the same way if he thought that Viktor Orbán belongs in such an initiative. Not as a follower, not afterward, but as a founder.
❗️Viktor Orbán has received a letter from Donald Trump!❗️
The Hungarian government’s peace policy, which it has represented for years, has once again borne fruit. This week, the President of the United States of America sent an official invitation to the prime minister to join the Gaza Peace Council, whose goal is to ensure lasting peace in the Middle East.
As Donald Trump put it, the activities of the peace council will involve the world’s greatest leaders — including Hungary — working together to bring about a historic and magnificent agreement. The invitation is yet another proof of the success of the anti-war policy.
It is becoming increasingly clear: the Hungarian path, the path of peace, is the right path. As we have said all along.
That is why the sure choice is Fidesz.
This statement is not diplomatic information, but rather:
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end; it governs the text from start to finish.
🔹 Technique: personal storytelling (domestic framing)
🔹 How it works:
🔹 Effect:
👉 A classic soft-propaganda entry point.
🔹 Technique: authority borrowing
🔹 Key phrase:
“The most powerful leader in the world, Donald Trump…”
🔹 Trick:
🔹 Manipulation:
👉 The source is not verifiable, but emotionally too strong for the audience to question.
🔹 Technique: status inflation (rank inflation)
🔹 How it works:
🔹 Effect:
👉 This is not foreign policy, but leader mythology.
🔹 Technique: policy → character transformation
🔹 Logical slippage:
🔹 Narrative logic:
Orbán wants peace → the world recognizes it → therefore he was always right
👉 Circular reasoning, without evidence.
🔹 Technique: symbolic anchoring
🔹 Observation:
🔹 Function:
👉 The conflict is a tool, not the subject of analysis.
🔹 Technique: campaign closure
🔹 Structure:
🔹 Effect:
👉 The political decision becomes a moral obligation.
This text:
but instead:
✔️ manufactures emotional legitimacy,
✔️ authenticates itself through external authority,
✔️ communicates a pre-closed political decision.
👉 Classic campaign propaganda, labeled as “peace,” within a leader-centered narrative.
There are moments when the truth breaks through even on the “other side.”
This is exactly what happened yesterday on the Partizán show, where Dániel Róna, the Tisza Party’s in-house pollster, spoke with unexpected candor about the party’s candidates.
The expert stated bluntly: politics is a profession, and the Tisza candidates represent a serious risk. He even used a vivid analogy: “No one would want to board an airplane whose pilot is still learning.”
According to Róna, “the possibility of making mistakes is significantly increased,” which is precisely why they are trying to keep Tisza candidates out of the public spotlight. In his view, this lack of experience “is not an advantage in a campaign situation.”
We couldn’t have put it better ourselves. Politics is not a playground—especially not in such dangerous, wartime times.
Take a look at what Dániel Róna, Péter Magyar’s in-house pollster, said about the kind of analogies he uses when describing what a Tisza government would be like. After all, this is a profession, and I assume no one would want to sit on an airplane flown by a pilot who is only just learning the trade. So the risk of mistakes is clearly much higher, and this also explains a lot about Péter Magyar’s caution—why he is trying to minimize the public appearances of candidates at this stage of the campaign.
The truth is, I couldn’t have said it more nicely myself: what this would mean for the country is essentially an airplane disaster in the making. That’s why I continue to say that we should stick with the safe choice—and that is Fidesz.
Sticking with the analogy: whoever…
The statement does not aim to inform, nor does it engage in a substantive debate about the Tisza Party’s actual governing capacity. Instead, it:
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end but is fixed in advance:
“If not Fidesz, then catastrophe.”
Key figure: Róna Dániel
Referenced platform: Partizán
🔹 Technique: source diversion (selective quoting + authority hijacking)
🔹 How it works:
🔹 Manipulation:
Róna Dániel → “Tisza has admitted its own incompetence.”
👉 A classic propaganda move: “We’re not saying it — they are.”
🔹 Technique: false analogy + existential fear
🔹 Mechanism:
🔹 What’s the trick?
👉 It does not invite deliberation, but triggers panic.
🔹 Technique: perpetual state of emergency
🔹 Effect:
👉 Authoritarian axiom:
“In a crisis, change is not allowed.”
🔹 Technique: attribution of intent without evidence
🔹 Claim: “They avoid public appearances because they would make mistakes.”
🔹 Reality:
👉 Classic criminalizing logic:
“If you’re not visible, you must be hiding something.”
🔹 Constructed choice:
🔹 What’s missing:
👉 This is not an electoral offer, but psychological coercion.
Key sentence:
“Only Fidesz is the safe choice.”
🔹 Technique: mantra-like repetition
🔹 Function:
👉 Anyone choosing differently is framed as irresponsible, not merely dissenting.
This text is not about the competence of the Tisza Party, but about using fear to eliminate the possibility of change, monopolizing the concept of safety under the name of Fidesz, while framing the mere existence of Magyar Péter and the Tisza Party as a risk in itself.
Péter Magyar lied, and once again he got caught. NO ONE attacked the Tisza candidate in Vác. He is lying, pro-Brussels, pro-war, pro-Ukrainian – DANGEROUS!
Everyone heard how earlier this week Péter Magyar flooded the internet with tears and hysterics, claiming that the nasty Fidesz supporters were attacking Tisza candidates. One such alleged incident was said to have happened around Vác. Well, the police questioned the Tisza candidate in Vác, who stated that he was not attacked at all, not even verbally insulted by anyone. In other words, the entire story was a huge fabrication. He is lying, pro-Brussels, pro-war, pro-Ukrainian. This is Péter Magyar, and that is why he is dangerous. Enjoy skating, everyone!
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The aim of the statement is not to clarify the truth, but to:
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end, but is pre-set in the very first line.
🔹 Technique: preemptive delegitimization
🔹 How it works:
👉 This eliminates any possibility of substantive evaluation.
🔹 Technique: total denial
🔹 Trick:
👉 An administrative act is transformed into a moral verdict.
🔹 Technique: label stacking
🔹 How it works:
👉 The goal is not understanding, but instinctive rejection.
🔹 Technique: false consensus effect
🔹 Impact:
👉 A classic method of manufacturing crowd pressure.
🔹 Technique: infantilization
🔹 Function:
👉 “We’re laughing at it, therefore it can’t be serious.”
This text:
❌ provides no evidence,
❌ cites no official sources,
❌ clarifies no actual events,
but instead:
✅ manufactures a pre-designated enemy image,
✅ fuels emotional panic,
✅ enforces moral exclusion.
👉 What matters is not the truth, but who is labeled “dangerous” — and who is not allowed to ask questions.
We already know exactly what the Tisza supporters’ economic program is.
According to them, the utility cost reduction is a sham that should not be supported.
We in Fidesz think exactly the opposite: we have defended utility cost reductions time and again so that Hungarian families can keep more money.
And we will continue to do so in the future, which is why Fidesz is the safe choice.
There has not been such a cold winter in our country for decades; due to the prolonged snow conditions and persistent sub-zero temperatures, protecting utility cost reductions is more relevant than ever.
Let us not risk Hungarian families’ secure energy supply and low utility costs!
Only Fidesz is the safe choice.
Now let me show you Tisza’s real utility policy. Utility cost reduction is also a sham. If you pay more for something, that is a much better thing. Utility cost reduction is actually a lie.
Utility cost reduction can be questioned. This has now become the world’s bluff in the end. In this form, this system cannot be supported. I won’t say everything, because then we would fail.
The statement is not a debate on economic policy, but rather:
👉 The endpoint is pre-fixed:
“If it’s not us, there is danger.”
🔹 Technique: false certainty
🔹 Trick:
👉 The purpose of the statement is not proof, but to shut down debate from the outset.
🔹 Technique: symbolic oversimplification
🔹 Mechanism:
👉 As a result, anyone who criticizes it is automatically labeled anti-family.
🔹 Technique: context-free threat framing
🔹 Trick:
👉 Cold weather is not an argument, but an emotional fast lane.
🔹 Technique: false dilemma
🔹 Message:
👉 All other alternatives are rendered invisible.
🔹 Technique: exclusivity claim
🔹 Effect:
👉 Classic authoritarian rhetoric.
🔹 Technique: strawman
🔹 Mechanism:
👉 It does not attack the opponent’s real position, but a fabricated version of it.
🔹 Technique: controlled honesty
🔹 Meaning:
👉 This is not criticism of the opponent, but self-exposure.
This text:
Instead, it:
✔ manufactures fear
✔ enforces identity
✔ claims exclusivity
✔ and pre-emptively absolves itself of responsibility for consequences
👉 Message in one sentence:
“If we are not in control, you are in danger.”
When we hear the phrase “AGE OF DANGERS,” we may think of things like the following:
❗️At such a time, it is life-threatening to entrust the leadership of a country to a lying, hot-headed person controlled from Brussels.
What is needed is common sense, routine, experience, and calm—otherwise we will pay the price.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The text is not a situational analysis, nor a debate about risk management. Instead, it is:
👉 The conclusion is not reached at the end; it is given from the outset:
“If we are not in control, we die.”
The list is deliberately:
🔹 Technique: threat stacking
🔹 Effect:
– the audience does not weigh options
– does not prioritize
– switches exclusively into survival mode
👉 A classic Cold War propaganda tool, updated for the modern news-feed format.
The list deliberately makes no distinction between:
Greenland, Venezuela, Taiwan, Yemen, and North Korea are placed in the same weight class as a neighboring war.
🔹 Technique: false equivalence
🔹 Effect:
– every threat becomes “here and now”
– every political decision turns into an existential one
After the list, there is no analysis, but an immediate moral judgment:
“❗️At times like this, it is life-threatening to entrust the country to a lying, hot-headed person controlled from Brussels.”
🔹 Technique: fear → scapegoat jump
🔹 Trick:
– no evidence
– no causal link
– no specific policy failure
👉 Fear does not explain; it looks for a target.
Key labels:
🔹 Technique: ad hominem + foreign-control narrative
🔹 Effect:
– the opponent cannot be wrong, because they are inherently unfit
– the debate can be morally closed
👉 Not a political rival, but a security risk.
“We need common sense, routine, experience, and composure — otherwise we will lose everything.”
🔹 Technique: strongman framing
🔹 Message:
– in a crisis, questions are not allowed
– change is not allowed
– only the familiar hand may hold the helm
👉 Democracy implicitly becomes a luxury “we cannot afford right now.”
This text:
👉 The final, unspoken message:
“The world is too dangerous to try anything else.”
This is not argumentation, but fear-based loyalty enforcement —
classic authoritarian propaganda in modern news-feed language,
in the style of Németh Balázs.