85 days before the elections: a snapshot from a “neutral, objective newscast operating solely on news value.”
On Thursday we held talks in Belgrade, because we are getting closer and closer to Hungary acquiring a majority stake in the Serbian oil company. The necessary diplomatic work had to be done, since if we succeed, it would create a better situation than ever before in terms of regional supply security and energy prices.
It is obvious that such a historic deal is in the interest of every Hungarian citizen. We also held a press conference and gave a detailed briefing on the state of the negotiations, which are now approaching the finish line.
RTL, of course, did not consider this important at the time and did not report on the matter with a single word in their newscast…
Not like now!
Now they covered the topic in prime time, focusing only on the “essentials”: huge surprise, everyone should be outraged — we traveled by plane, and during the trip every member of the delegation even received food, including the press officer — namely bread, ham, vegetables, and a bit of fruit.
What’s more, RTL is once again stirring things up through a colleague who appeared on their screen not long ago. Naturally, while Evelin Gáspár was working for RTL, the channel had no problem either with her person or with her breakfast.
But now it is prime-time political news that she works as a press officer at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and receives food on a flight.
Fair enough…
In any case, we will continue working to ensure that Hungarian people pay the lowest utility prices in all of Europe — including those who put this piece together.
We know the saying: even those who don’t vote for us benefit from us 🇭🇺 Bravo, RTL — you really have every reason to be proud of yourselves!! Oh, wait… no.
(And just in case you might have forgotten: my godfather is a retired alumina factory worker from Almásfüzitő, not a dismissed deputy CEO of MÁV… you do remember, right?)
A short message to the Tisza supporters who are laughing here on Facebook at the pro-peace, anti-war posts and at the anti-war rally in Miskolc: don’t worry, we will save you from the war as well—save you from the warmonger Manfred Weber and from his puppet, Péter Magyar. The sensible majority will take care of this on April 12.
🎯 Core Function (Real Objective)
The text is not a debate, not persuasion, and not argumentation, but rather:
the demonstration of moral superiority,
the infantilization of the opponent,
the advance announcement of a threatening majority verdict,
and the pre-emptive moral absolution of one’s own side for any potential aggression.
👉 Pre-fixed endpoint: “Anyone who laughs or criticizes now will be dealt with later – for their own good.”
1️⃣ “A short message to the Tisza supporters” – collective address + stigmatization
🔹 Technique: collective labeling 🔹 Mechanism:
“Tisza supporters” are not individuals, but a single homogeneous, mocking mass
no distinction is made between opinions, motives, or positions
🔹 Effect:
the opponent is not a debate partner but a morally inferior group
If Tisza comes to power, that’s the end of family-friendly tax policy! The multinationals are already rubbing their hands 🤷♂️ The new Tisza “star signing,” the so-called captain, says that as soon as they get the chance, he would abolish the bank tax and the taxes imposed on multinationals. Well, that’s exactly what we’re saying: a Bajnai-fan, globalist corporate boss will never become a patriot who supports Hungarian families.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The statement is not an economic policy debate, but rather:
pre-fabricated fear-mongering (“the end of family-friendly tax policy”),
scapegoating (Tisza + multinationals),
moral exclusion (“cannot be a patriot”),
and identity-based loyalty enforcement.
👉 The final conclusion is already embedded in the very first sentence: “If Tisza comes to power, Hungarian families will be harmed.”
Every subsequent element serves to reinforce this message.
1️⃣ Apocalyptic opening – shutting down debate at the start
“If Tisza comes, family-friendly tax policy is over!”
🔹 Technique: doomsday rhetoric 🔹 Effect:
it does not present a risk, but a certain catastrophe,
it excludes “partially,” “under conditions,” or “debatable” interpretations.
👉 Classic authoritarian framing: no deliberation, only a survival choice.
2️⃣ “The multinationals are already rubbing their hands” – conspiratorial insinuation
🔹 Technique: enemy visualization 🔹 Tools:
no specific company,
no figures,
no quotations,
only an image: the greedy, smirking “multinational”.
🔹 Effect:
emotional imagery overrides factual scrutiny,
the opponent is automatically framed as serving “foreign interests”.
👉 No proof is needed – hatred is enough.
3️⃣ Selective economic oversimplification
“They would abolish the bank tax and the taxes on multinationals”
🔹 Technique: removal of context 🔹 What is deliberately omitted:
what would replace them,
on what timeline,
with what budgetary logic,
with what form of social compensation.
👉 A complex tax-system debate is transformed into moral betrayal.
It is nonsense that Brussels would pour another 800 billion euros into the bottomless pit of war, which would take 1.3 million forints from every Hungarian family.
We, however, will not give in to senseless war spending, and we will not allow Hungarians’ money to be wasted on weapons and destruction. ❗We will decide on this too in April. 🟠 Only Fidesz is the safe choice.
How absurd is this for Hungarian families? So absurd that every Hungarian family would have to cough up 1.3 million forints out of their own pocket. Complete nonsense. So when it comes to war, I have to say we are facing two dangers at the same time. One is obviously the physical danger, which could be talked about at length—it’s horrific. If you ask those who lived through a war, only the most tragic stories come up. That’s one part of it.
But there is also the economic danger, which we must not forget either. And the situation is that already a very, very, very large amount of money has gone to Ukraine. The money Ukraine has received in just the past three years is three times as much as Hungary has received over the entire period of its membership in the European Union. And that money could just as well have gone to EU member states—it could have gone to Hungary too. It could have gone toward pulling Europe out of the economic hole that, in many respects, Europe pushed itself into.
So I think this is noticeable, and they are not stopping. The fact is, they are not stopping—so we should stop as well from protesting against it.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
Not to provide a factual presentation of EU financing, but to:
generate existential fear (“they will take your money”),
designate external enemies (Brussels, Ukraine),
provide internal absolution (the government is not responsible),
present an exclusive solution: Fidesz = security.
👉 The conclusion is pre-determined; every sentence serves this end.
1️⃣ Fictional Cost Attribution – “1.3 million forints from every family”
🔹 Technique: dropping a shocking number 🔹 Trick:
no legal mechanism,
no budgetary breakdown,
no taxation pathway.
🔹 Effect: The listener experiences a non-existent obligation as a personal financial loss.
👉 Classic propaganda rule: “If the number is big enough, nobody asks questions.”
2️⃣ Instrumentalization of War Trauma
“If we ask our ancestors who lived through a war…”
🔹 Technique: emotional appropriation of collective memory 🔹 Effect:
debate becomes impossible,
anyone who questions it is labeled “insensitive.”
👉 This is emotional blackmail, not argumentation.
3️⃣ Dual-Threat Narrative (“physical + economic”)
🔹 Technique: existential double bind 🔹 Message:
if you’re not afraid of bombs,
be afraid of losing your money.
👉 The goal: maintaining a constant sense of threat.
4️⃣ Relative Falsehood –
“Ukraine has received three times more than Hungary ever has”
🔹 Technique: context shifting 🔹 Manipulation:
wartime emergency aid ↔ decades of cohesion funding,
conflation of entirely different legal and budgetary categories.
🔹 Effect: envy + perceived injustice.
👉 A textbook “they’re taking what should be yours” narrative.
5️⃣ False Dilemma
“This money could have gone to Europe, to Hungary…”
🔹 Technique: forced either-or framing 🔹 Reality:
the EU budget is not a zero-sum household wallet,
crisis management and development funds are not interchangeable.
👉 The simplification serves anger management, not solutions.
6️⃣ “We Are Protesting” – Performative Resistance
🔹 Technique: symbolic opposition 🔹 Effect:
the audience feels “someone is fighting for them,”
while no real alternative or consequence is presented.
👉 This is emotional substitution, not political action.
7️⃣ Closing: Exclusive Choice
“🟠 Only Fidesz is the safe choice.”
🔹 Technique: political coercion 🔹 Message:
either you are with us,
or your family is in danger.
👉 This is authoritarian decision enforcement, not democratic debate.
🧠 Final Assessment
This text is:
not analysis,
not economic debate,
not peace policy,
but fear-based propaganda, which:
shocks with fabricated numbers,
exploits war trauma,
assigns external enemies,
and elevates a single political actor as the sole savior.
👉 If every message ends with the same party as the “safe choice,” then the beginning was never about informing you.
The money of Budapest residents is in Gergely Karácsony’s pocket.
While the government invested 3,000 billion forints in developing the capital, while Karácsony’s administration’s main revenues nearly doubled, and while they were unable to show a single independent development over six years, we are supposed to believe that the mayor has nothing to do with the financial troubles of the Budapest Municipality.
The people of Budapest are far smarter than that, Mr. Mayor!
So money clearly went to all of this: dozens upon dozens of advisors, massive communication billboards, and so on, and so on. Money was definitely spent on these things, and it was also spent on projects that were really more about appearances — superficial, cosmetic efforts — like so-called housing bridge programs, where maybe a dozen apartments were managed to be rented out in a year, through “Maxwell” or similar completely unserious initiatives. And it’s very hard to see through what is actually going on inside the companies involved.
So I think this is really where the problem lies, because if we look at what happened over time: there was this huge Karácsony Gergely–style performance — leaning back, playing the overturned beetle — claiming that everything would grind to a halt, that the capital would go bankrupt, because without money they wouldn’t be able to close the fiscal year.
And then December 31 passed, January 1 arrived, and it turned out that Budapest did not go bankrupt after all. Everything continues to operate as before, even though Gergely Karácsony said that if he didn’t get this and that and that — which he was in fact demanding back completely without legal grounds — then it would all be over.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The statement is not a substantive analysis of Budapest’s finances, but rather serves to:
personally blame Gergely Karácsony,
render government-level withdrawals and decisions invisible,
and suggest that “if there is a problem, the money must have ended up in the mayor’s pocket.”
👉 Pre-fixed conclusion: “The capital’s financial problems are not systemic, but stem from Karácsony’s incompetence.”
1️⃣ Monetary Scapegoating
“The money of Budapest residents is in Karácsony Gergely’s pocket.”
🔹 Technique: criminalizing metaphor 🔹 Effect: – implies theft without evidence – triggers emotional outrage (“they stole our money”) – no data needed, the image alone is sufficient
👉 A classic authoritarian move: assertion → moral judgment → no burden of proof.
2️⃣ False Comparison (False Balance)
“The government developed the capital with 3,000 billion forints” vs. “they were unable to show a single independent development”
🔹 Technique: context removal 🔹 Trick: – omits where the government funding came from (EU funds, central-state projects) – omits what was simultaneously taken away from the capital – the notion of “independent development” is deliberately left vague
👉 Logical fallacy: if there is no money and no authority, there can be no “independent” development either.
🔹 Technique: mockery + trivialization 🔹 Effect: – all social or experimental programs become laughable – impact is irrelevant; mood is everything – the audience does not evaluate, it ridicules
👉 If you ridicule it, you don’t have to refute it.
4️⃣ Vague Corruption Suggestion
“it’s hard to see what’s going on inside the companies” “that’s where the dog is buried”
🔹 Technique: evidence-free insinuation 🔹 Mechanism: – no concrete accusation is made – yet a sense of corruption is created – legally untouchable, politically toxic
👉 A classic dog-whistle technique.
5️⃣ Apocalypse Bluff, Reframed After the Fact
“the capital will go bankrupt” → yet it didn’t
🔹 Technique: retrospective delegitimization 🔹 Manipulation: – conceals why bankruptcy did not occur – conceals the temporary fixes and legal workarounds used – survival itself is framed as proof of deception
👉 If it didn’t die, then it must have been pretending.
6️⃣ Populist Closure – “In the Name of the People”
“Budapest residents are much smarter than that!”
🔹 Technique: collective authorization 🔹 Effect: – anyone who disagrees is “not smart” – the speaker positions themselves as the voice of “the people” – debate is closed
👉 This is not an argument; it is a final verdict.
🧠 Summary – What Is Actually Happening?
This statement:
❌ provides no numerical, verifiable data ❌ avoids any discussion of government responsibility ❌ offers no systemic analysis ✅ relies on character assassination + emotional manipulation
👉 The goal is not truth, but a lasting mental image: “Karácsony = money pit = liar = incompetent.”
I made a video last week about the Tisza Party candidate in North Pest, Anna Müller, who is a teacher, a high school teacher, and who says that in her school children are living in fear, they are anxious, they have no motivation to go to school, they are afraid of tests, and of course everything is blamed on the government, or rather on Viktor Orbán’s policies. Overload, anxiety, pressure to perform.
Several people commented on this video and sent messages on Messenger saying that this is not acceptable: that a teacher complains about the education system and says that in her school children are terrified, feel unwell — but did she try to address this problem? Did she report it to anyone? If she could not solve it herself, did she ask for help?
Simply saying, like every Tisza supporter, that “the country doesn’t work, education doesn’t work, and then everything will be much better once there is a change of government” — nobody buys that.
🎯 Core Function (real purpose)
The statement is not about the condition of the education system, and it does not examine children’s mental strain, but instead:
delegitimizes the teacher who voices criticism,
discredits the Tisza narrative,
disconnects the problem from the systemic level,
and preemptively rejects the possibility of change (“no one is buying this”).
👉 The conclusion is fixed in advance: “Problems in education are not systemic; the critical speaker is either incompetent or acting in bad faith.”
1️⃣ Individualization of the problem – detaching the system
“…a teacher is complaining… did she try to resolve the problem?”
Hi everyone! According to the “dream book” of politics, it is not advisable to label voters. To speak harshly about them, to criticize them, to demean or degrade them. But I think that is the dream book of politicians. I am not a politician. I am a journalist, although I do not really consider myself one. On Facebook, for lack of a better option, I selected it from a dropdown menu. Media worker, presenter—that probably fits me better.
And when I tell you that, even separating myself from my employer, I am speaking as Krisztián Lentulai, a Hungarian citizen, because I am expressing my feelings to you, then take it that way.
Those people from Tisza. Those from DK. But above all now, the Tisza supporters. Those who wish for my death. Those who want to wait for me at my workplace and smash my head in. Those who, in a somewhat gentler way compared to the previous ones, simply want me to lose my job. Or want me thrown into prison.
I hold them responsible for it if hell breaks loose here and a civil war situation develops. I hold them very, very responsible.
🎯 Core Function (real objective)
The text is not a personal confession, but rather:
enemy construction,
moral self-exoneration for one’s own aggressive speech,
fear-mongering, and
preemptive scapegoating for a potential future conflict.
👉 The ultimate message: “If there is violence, it won’t be because of me, but because of them.”
This is one of the most serious propaganda maneuvers.
1️⃣ “I am not a politician” – role masking (role laundering)
Key statements:
“I am not a politician.”
“I am speaking as a Hungarian citizen.”
“I am expressing my feelings.”
🔹 Technique: evasion of responsibility 🔹 Trick: – while delivering a political message, – the speaker detaches himself from political accountability
👉 Classic propaganda move: political speech = “just a private opinion.”
2️⃣ Pseudo-objectivity and status shifting
Key elements:
“I am a journalist, although I don’t consider myself one”
“media worker, host”
“independent even from my employer”
🔹 Technique: identity blending 🔹 Effect: – when advantageous: journalist – when responsibility arises: private individual
👉 This is credibility maneuvering, not honesty.
3️⃣ Collective stigmatization (group guilt)
Keywords:
“those Tisza supporters”
“DK supporters”
“but above all now, the Tisza supporters”
🔹 Technique: collective labeling 🔹 Operation: – anonymous, unverified claims – criminalization of an entire political community
👉 Individual threats ≠ collective guilt
This is a basic propaganda rule: if no one is named, the stain can be applied to anyone.
4️⃣ Victim posture + fear spiral
Claims:
“they wish for my death”
“they want to smash my head in”
“they want to throw me in prison”
🔹 Technique: victimization 🔹 Problem: – no evidence – no concrete individuals – no mention of legal action or reports
👉 Emotional shock precedes rational evaluation.
5️⃣ Preemptive transfer of responsibility (preemptive blame)
Key sentence (critical):
“I hold them responsible if things spiral out of control here and a civil-war-like situation emerges.”
🔴 THIS IS THE MOST DANGEROUS PART
🔹 Technique: legitimization of future violence 🔹 Logic: – I am only speaking – they are provoking – if something happens, it is their fault
👉 This is a textbook example of authoritarian propaganda.
6️⃣ Implicit threat + moral blackmail
Hidden message:
“if you don’t stay silent”
“if you criticize”
“then you will be responsible”
🔹 Technique: moral pressure 🔹 Effect: – silencing – self-censorship – “better not speak up”
🧠 Summary propaganda formula
Structure of the text:
I am not a politician
Yet I name political enemies
They threaten me
I am the victim
If violence occurs → it is their fault
👉 This is not an opinion. This is narrative construction.
📌 Final conclusion
This statement is:
not innocent,
not personal,
not journalistic,
but conflict-escalating propaganda, which:
❗ normalizes political hatred ❗ asserts collective guilt ❗ preemptively absolves its own side of all consequences
And the day came when László Kéri from Tisza sat down and told it to our faces that Hungary cannot withdraw itself from the war. In my view, Hungary will not be able to pull itself out of this. Here it is in a longer version as well. László Kéri talks about Europe preparing for war, and that if Péter Magyar comes to power, he will have no other choice either, because Hungary cannot remove itself from the war. Europe has already decided this, and if you look at the leading nations, it is clear that from German military diplomacy to the British, it is being seriously considered that further conflict with the Russians is not out of the question, and that Europe should prepare for Russia to become its long-term military adversary. In my view, Hungary will not be able to get out of this.
Dear László Kéri, Péter Magyar, and all the other Tisza sect members: go to hell! Viktor Orbán will stay instead, and he will make sure that Hungary does not go to war, just as he has managed to do over the past four years.
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The text does not inform, and it is not a geopolitical analysis. Instead, it serves to:
instill fear (“war is inevitable”),
create scapegoats (Tisza, Kéri, Péter Magyar),
present a single ‘savior’,
force emotional loyalty.
👉 The conclusion is fixed in advance: “If it’s not Viktor Orbán, then there will be war.”
1️⃣ “We’re not saying it — he is” – outsourcing responsibility
“…the Tisza-affiliated László Kéri sat down and told it to our faces…”
🔹 Technique: outsourcing of blame 🔹 How it works:
no direct claim is made,
instead, someone is “quoted,”
and the quote is then presented as destiny.
🔹 Manipulation: Kéri’s opinion = objective reality = inevitable war.
👉 The audience does not examine context, only emotional content.
2️⃣ Determinism: “this has already been decided”
“Europe has already decided this” “Hungary cannot extract itself”
🔹 Technique: narrative of inevitability 🔹 Effect:
the illusion of political choice disappears,
the future becomes a “forced track.”
👉 A classic authoritarian move: if there is no choice, there is no responsibility either.
Péter Magyar has introduced his new “economic development” expert, who openly admits to being a big fan of Gordon Bajnai 🤷♂️ This is going to hurt!! But only if we allow the Bajnai team to take over the country’s leadership.
Author – Németh Balázs: If Bajnai returns, it will hurt every Hungarian family and pensioner. We already got to know them before 2010!
Author – Németh Balázs: It’s hard to create a clearer situation before an election than this: do we bring back the pre-2010 world, with a left-wing economic policy that supports multinationals and squeezes families? Or do we continue along the patriotic Hungarian path?
🎯 Core Function (Real Purpose)
The text is not an economic policy analysis, but rather:
fear-mongering,
scapegoating,
reactivating past trauma,
enforcing a binary (“either–or”) political choice.
👉 The conclusion is predetermined: “Fidesz is the only acceptable choice.”
1️⃣ “Bajnai = it will hurt” – activating traumatic associations
“If Bajnai comes, it will hurt every Hungarian family and pensioner.”
🔹 Technique: emotional conditioning 🔹 Tool: metaphor of physical pain (“it will hurt”)
What does this do?
It does not discuss a program
It does not discuss concrete measures
It creates a sensation: pain, loss, fear
👉 This is not an argument, but an emotional trigger.
2️⃣ Guilt by association
“Magyar Péter introduced his new expert, who is an open admirer of Gordon Bajnai.”
🔹 Technique: associative stigmatization 🔹 Logic:
what the person says does not matter,
what matters is who they like.
👉 A classic propaganda trick: “If A was bad, and B likes A, then B must also be bad.”
❗ It’s not us saying this, but them themselves: Tisza would be the government of austerity. ❗ They would raise taxes, because in their view the flat tax is “complete nonsense.” Pensioners have also been targeted: they call the 14th-month pension “pure madness,” and describe the current pension system as “too generous,” therefore saying pensions should be “reduced.” They openly talk about the fact that they would “take away the benefits within five minutes,” and would also eliminate hospital beds.
We must not allow Tisza to burden Hungarians with new charges and, through Brussels, finance the war from it! As they themselves put it: “We can’t say everything, because then we would fail.” But regardless of how they deny it, regardless of how they lie, we will not allow them to hide the truth!
In April, the only safe choice is Fidesz! 🟠 This is Magyar Péter’s austerity program.
Someone says they are progressive—perhaps that can be acknowledged. In Hungary as well, they now want to introduce a multi-bracket tax system. The 14th-month pension is “pure madness.” The pension system is now too generous; it should be relatively reduced. “Within five minutes, they will take it away.” The same system that existed together does not necessarily need to be maintained. It is not certain that basic hospital capacities should be started everywhere. Take, for example, the flat tax system—it is complete nonsense, and I do not agree with it at all. “I won’t say everything, because then we would fail.”
1️⃣ “It’s not us saying this, but them themselves” – source shifting (outsourcing of blame)
🔹 Technique: apparent objectivity 🔹 How it works: – the government narrative does not assert, it “quotes” – responsibility is shifted onto the opponent (“they said it”)
👉 Effect: the audience does not examine the context of the quote, only its emotional charge.
2️⃣ Collective labeling – “Tisza would be the government of austerity”
🔹 Technique: pre-fabricated identity 🔹 How it works: – a heterogeneous opposition space is collapsed into a single negative concept – there is no policy debate, only stigma
👉 Classic branding propaganda: repeat it often enough and it starts to feel true.
“14th-month pension = pure madness” “too generous system” “pensions should be reduced”
🔹 Technique: target-group-specific intimidation 🔹 How it works: – direct targeting of the most sensitive voter group (the elderly) – the future is framed as loss
👉 Loss aversion: fear is stronger than promise.
4️⃣ “They will take it away within five minutes” – time pressure and panic
🔹 Technique: urgency, disabling rational thinking 🔹 How it works: – no time for consideration – the decision becomes an emotional reflex
👉 Classic campaign tool: now or never.
5️⃣ Talking about hospital closures – symbolic destruction of infrastructure
🔹 Technique: public services as emotional symbols 🔹 How it works: – the “hospital bed” is not policy, but a symbol of safety – change equals danger
👉 It’s not about where or why, but about “taking it away.”
6️⃣ Brussels + war = external enemy construction
🔹 Technique: externalization 🔹 How it works: – domestic political debate → geopolitical threat – the opponent is not mistaken, but a traitor
👉 This narrative absolves the government of all internal consequences.
7️⃣ “We can’t say everything, because then we would fail” – self-justifying ‘exposure’
🔹 Technique: dramatization of selective quotations 🔹 How it works: – the statement is presented as a conspiracy – the government’s role: “we expose the truth”
👉 It works even if the quote is taken out of context or distorted.
8️⃣ Binary closure – “only Fidesz”
🔹 Technique: false dilemma 🔹 How it works: – no alternatives – no nuance – no debate
👉 The choice is framed not as political, but as a moral obligation.
Summary – what is actually happening?
❌ Not a program debate ❌ Not public policy ❌ Not fact-checking
✔ Emotional mobilization ✔ Fear + enemy construction ✔ Legitimation of a single outcome
The text does not want you to understand—it wants you to be afraid, and to automatically choose Fidesz, while the opponent—here, Magyar Péter and Tisza—is compressed into a single negative archetype.
