Balázs Németh: Good morning. It’s 28 July 2025, 258 days before the expected date of the parliamentary election. This is Fight Hour: a programme in which we tell the truth, expose fake news, analyse current domestic and foreign political events, and explain what best serves the interests of the Hungarian people. News, information, press reviews – all live on YouTube, on the Fight Hour channel. This is a new channel, so please follow us in large numbers – and live on Facebook, on the “Németh Balázs Vagyok” page. And as we’re broadcasting live, you can also send in comments, and I’ll respond to them – or rather, to those that are worth responding to. The first guest on this programme is Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, leader of “Harcosok Klubja” [Hungary’s “Fight Club”]. Good morning. Thank you for being here.
Good morning.
Is there even a Fight Club anymore? The army of opposing fighters is burying it, especially since Tusványos, and now there’s even Fight Hour to provoke them.
Now it’s truly got real! Now it’s really on fire! According to last night’s tally, there are 30,000 members in the Fight Club and 40,000 in the digital civic circles: this is how we look. There will always be a Fight Club. At the same time, it’s also certain that not everyone will always be a member of the Fight Club. But Fight Club will always exist, because people are incensed by injustice. So when they encounter flagrant lies, they look for a place where they can say that this isn’t true, that it’s a lie, they take offence, or they want to help other people learn the truth. This is why there will always be fighters. When there’s peace, what does being a fighter mean? We know what it means in war. When there’s peace, a fighter is someone who stands up, fights for justice, and speaks their mind. What usually happens then? People respond to them: a scuffle, some slapping, a fight begins – and not everyone can handle that. There are those who aren’t suited to such things at all, and there are even those who are completely fed up with it – but at the same time they have an opinion on things. These people tend to be in the middle class. So I think our world is this large, broad middle-class, national camp. We’re talking about millions of sympathisers, one section of which will get involved, and the other section of which will go about its own business.
We’ll also discuss the digital civic circles in detail, and the attacks sustained by nationalist, conservative-minded people on the Right – mainly on social media platforms. But let’s start with the fact that it’s no secret – or if it was a secret up to now, it’s no longer a secret – that the idea of launching a programme like Fight Hour on social media was primarily yours. This is because politics has changed.
We talked about this a lot. Our experience is that for fifteen to twenty years it was civic and sensible political behaviour to ignore all the nonsense and huge lies that were being said. If we reacted to it, we’d do more harm than good, because we’d be amplifying the falsehoods. But since the digital world conquered politics this is no longer the case. People are willing to accept even the most absurd things – if not as true, then at least as probable. Therefore, if you don’t react immediately, the lie will conquer the internet. And if you wait an hour or two it’s already too late. So this is why, when we were talking, we thought that it would be good to have a place where you can say right away, early in the morning, “People, that’s nonsense, that’s drivel, that’s fake; but this is reality, this is the truth.” I don’t know if this channel will be like that, but if it is, then that will be good.
That’s our plan, and one important goal is to stop the spread of fake news as early as possible. Speed is also important when it comes to exciting, interesting topics, so we’ll talk about the end of the tariff war, or what’s arguably the end of it...
About the opening of it...
...the agreement between the EU and Trump, von der Leyen and Trump. But let’s start with some baloney – excuse me for using that word – that’s appeared on social media. In the past, if someone said something crazy, I don’t know, they went to the pub or the market, and five people heard them; but now on social media, it reaches 500,000, 1.5 million, however many Hungarians.
Here, for example, is this guy called Ákos Hadházy, who...
Yes, it’s a difficult case, because I see that to the Left he looks like a star, while to the Right he looks clownish. So on this side we don’t believe a word he says, while on the other side they take everything he says at face value.
There are several people like that on the Left. So Hadházy has made a video, and I think we can show it.
Ákos Hadházy (from a video recording): We’re a few kilometres from Hatvanpuszta, and we can see some very strange earth ramparts here. The funny thing is that this is where Gulyáságyú Média first photographed the zebras, which have since become very famous. So you could see the zebras from here. There was a road here, and we can see a fence there. If we look at the fence, it’s been closed off with another length of steel mesh, and they put an earth rampart here so that it’s not possible to see the zebras. So if we want to see them we might need to use a mobile viewing platform.
Balázs Németh: I’d date the milestone of when you started reacting to obvious nonsense to somewhere around the time of the story of the biting zebras. It was Péter Magyar who threw out the idea that there are vicious zebras in Hatvanpuszta. They’re so vicious that even your grandchildren are afraid of them, and if I remember correctly, Péter Magyar got this information from the Carmelite monastery [the Prime Minister’s Office]. So there was this zebra affair, and we see that even today, several months later, Ákos Hadházy is still looking for zebras in Hatvanpuszta...
There’s no limit to stupidity – that much is clear. I’m grateful to Győző Gáspár, who helped set this whole thing straight – and we made a joke out of something that lacks all seriousness. This is in the countryside – and, as we know, our fellow Member of Parliament Mr. Hadházy doesn’t belong there. He’s got everything mixed up. To start with myself, I live in Felcsút, that’s where our house is. My father has a farm under construction, and it’s not yet operational. Despite this, Hadházy says that a whole host of discussions have already taken place there. But it’s a farm under construction, an agricultural centre. And then there’s Bicske, where – if I’m not mistaken – he’s currently visiting. These are three different places and different settlements, and he’s mixed everything up. The place he’s is in now is Bicske – not Hatvanpuszta, and not Felcsút.
If we show this still image from the video for a moment, it shows that an earthen embankment was built to “block the view of the zebras”, but not where he says. But there are no zebras anyway, and here next to it – you can perhaps see it, as I’m pointing to it with the mouse – there’s a gate, which you could easily see through. This is basically stupid.
It’s not stupid: we’re talking about an urbanite. Mr. Hadházy has no links with the Hungarian countryside. He thinks that if you build a few metres of embankment you’ve solved the problem of people being able to see beyond it. But you can’t surround half the forest and the fields with fence panels. In the countryside, you can’t block the view with an earth embankment, because everything’s freely accessible for hundreds or thousands of metres.
Whereas, for example, Hadházy...
On a residential estate, excuse me, on a residential estate you can do that – but in a village?
...buoyed up by his great success – the success being that these stories are spreading on Facebook, even though they’re fake news – is also spreading the story that you went to Tusványos on a military plane, when you shouldn’t have done.
Of course I was on a military plane – because it wasn’t Viktor Orbán who was invited, but the Hungarian prime minister. I was there on official business.
While we’re on the subject of fake news...
Excuse me, let’s talk a little more about the planes, because I see that this is somehow a hot topic.
Yes.
I follow a very simple rule. If I’m going somewhere on a private trip, not on official business, not for an official visit or meeting, but for my own purposes, then I usually take a scheduled flight. If there’s only a low-cost flight available, as was the case last time, I’ll take the low-cost flight. There will certainly be more of these in the summer. If it’s a matter of going to a meeting...
I read that you went on a budget flight...
Of course!
If not you, then your son-in-law.
Yes. Another piece of nonsense. And if it’s a state visit, I always travel on a state-owned plane. There could be exceptions to this, because the law says that TEK – the Counter-Terrorism Centre, which guarantees the safety of protected persons – will decide how people can travel. So it could happen that TEK will say that there are circumstances when, even though it’s a private trip, you still have to travel on a protected flight. But this has never happened yet.
We’re still in the realm of nonsense, but let’s move on to more serious topics. And again it’s Hadházy – although I don’t want to turn Fight Hour into the Hadházy Show.
Yes, now we’ll find ourselves talking only about him.
Or rather about the lies that he’s spreading, or that he too is spreading on Facebook. And, for example, one of his lies from Saturday was picked up by some of the press. Here’s an article from one of the websites. After your speech in Tusványos, Ákos Hadházy wrote that he’d concluded from your speech that you’ve decided that the opposition can’t win the upcoming election. I remember him saying that the outcome of every democratic election is open, so the result can’t be guaranteed in either direction; and if this is indeed the case, if you’ve decided that the opposition can’t win, then some pretty harsh things could happen in the autumn. What will happen in the autumn?
The leaves will fall.
And is that harsh?
Harsh. Maybe the temperature will drop below freezing. School will start, and someone will get a bad grade. So harsh things like that can happen in the autumn. But getting back to the more serious part of the matter, there’s a phenomenon that this fake news clearly symbolises: fear. I don’t know why, but for some reason they like to be afraid. There are people who – like this fellow Member of Parliament – like to be afraid. He lives in fear, talking about how terrible things are going to happen tomorrow. I’m the exact opposite type of person. I don’t like to be afraid – I like to be hopeful and optimistic, and make plans for what we’re going to do. I don’t like to talk about how tomorrow will be the end of the world, Armageddon, and how terrible it will be... So I think the whole thing is basically a character problem.
Because there are people who spread fear. And since we’re on this, let’s finish it off...
It could also be a business – it’s not impossible that there’s a business called “fear”.
...because the hot topic is that if the ruling parties don’t win next year’s election, supposedly in April 2026, then they’ll want to maintain their power by force – even by force of arms. This is being written, for example, by a former president of the SZDSZ, and it’s being spread by influential opinion leaders, liberals and leftists. It comes up week after week.
Yes, yes. László Kéri regularly speaks out on this.
Are you planning something like that?
He was my teacher. I always say, “László, don’t be stupid, really, there are limits to everything!” Now, we may be on different wavelengths with different ideas about the future of the country, but one shouldn’t spread nonsense or stupidity. But this comes up before every election. And no one bothers to point out that I’m the only person in Hungarian politics who has won, lost, and then won again. So, the fundamental law of democracy is part of our lives – and that law says that, in the end, the people will decide.
What happens will be what the people decide.
Yesterday you posted a photo on Facebook showing you wearing a T-shirt with the slogan “⅘” on it. We’ll show you that in a moment, too. It was to illustrate just how big a victory Fidesz will win. That’s the message on the T-shirt.
I received it from members of the Hungarian community in Croatia who attended Tusnádfürdő. It’s a Hungarian invention from Croatia.
And it wasn’t the “⅘” that caused the liberal media to blow a fuse, but the fact that the date in smaller numbers under it referred to 12 April 2026, which is the expected date of the election.
That’s how it’s seen in Croatia.
That’s how it’s seen in Croatia, and that’s how it’s been expected for months...
...everyone...
...the opposition too, and that’s what you’ve been counting on in the Fight Club – for a very long time.
In this situation how should we calculate it? The first thing – or the first point, the starting point – is that the President of the Republic will decide. So the Constitution clearly states that the election must take place in April or May, according to the decision of the President of the Republic. And no one can take away or limit the President’s right to do so. The second point is that we have to prepare, and two months is a long time: April or May. So people usually prepare – I mean political parties prepare – to be fully armed and ready for battle as early as possible. Therefore, whenever we consider the possible date of the election, we always think of the earliest possible date. Next year the first weekend of April is Easter, so that’s not possible; so the earliest possible date will be the second weekend of April. That’s how we calculate it. Later the President will decide whether or not that will be the case.
When will Fidesz announce its candidates?
We basically have our candidates. There are 106 constituencies in the country, and we need to field that many candidates. There are three or four places for which the presidency hasn’t yet decided.
Well, it’s surreal that we’re talking about vicious zebras...
Indeed.
...but the truth is that hundreds of thousands of people are interested in this topic and similar nonsense on the internet. But let’s go in a slightly more serious direction.
Yes, but Balázs, let’s remember that we were just as surprised twenty years ago when tabloid journalism suddenly became popular. Many of us didn’t understand how: if you decided to read something in the morning with your coffee, or in your office, or in your morning break during your hard work, if you picked up a newspaper, how couldn’t it be a serious one – or, say, Nemzeti Sport? But Blikk? And suddenly it turned out that huge numbers of people preferred to pick up a Blikk rather than a Magyar Nemzet. And this is a phenomenon of the modern world. We don’t have to understand it – we just have to accept it. And this is the same now. So even if something is nonsense, somehow there can be more excitement, tension and interest in nonsense than in serious things. There are so many serious things in people’s lives that many prefer to escape from seriousness, to lighten the burden of life, and then look at junk food news. I think that’s what it’s about. But that doesn’t mean we should underestimate it – just as we shouldn’t underestimate the tabloid press. In the Anglo-Saxon world, say, in the English-speaking world, the most influential political vehicles and players are precisely the tabloid newspapers: the “tabloid press,” as they say over there.
But an extremely exciting question – to which we’ll get the answer in 2026 – is whether voters will elect a politician who can dance on the bow of a boat, or a politician who, say, has an opinion on the tariff war between the EU and the US.
Well, elections are a great mystery. Everyone talks about them, books have been written about them, there are libraries full of books about elections, but there’s still a mystery, a mystique about them; because ultimately no one knows how, on that Sunday morning or afternoon, the decision will be made in their own head.
I usually write about what’s on my mind, but yes, there are many people whose minds we cannot see into.
Yes, we don’t know. And it’s very interesting to see what factors people weigh up, and which people weigh up which factors. There’s no way of knowing. If it weren’t for this uncertainty, elections and politics could be modelled using mathematical formulas and deduced. But we’re human beings: we have hearts, we have feelings, we have impressions and personal sympathies. Some people calculate and think long-term, some seek security, some want adventure, and out of this great turmoil, an election result emerges – which is a very serious matter, because it decides the fate of a country.
Let’s talk about tariffs – and then I promise that we’ll move on to lighter topics. Yesterday afternoon Donald Trump and Ursula von der Leyen reached an agreement. Von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, says that the general 15 per cent tariff to be imposed on all European products in the United States is good news. Merz, the German chancellor, seems happy, and Meloni, the Italian prime minister, seems positive. But the economic players don’t seem happy. The Germans, including the German Industry Association and economic players active in the European Parliament, are writing about painful tariffs and disaster. According to them, this is unsatisfactory. Fight Hour. From the European side this doesn’t look like a good deal.
I read Mme. Le Pen’s statement, and it was devastating. Seriousness requires that we don’t go too far into such a serious matter without thorough knowledge of the details, and even the official announcements haven’t been released yet; and after the announcements the really important things will come, namely analysing what each sentence in an announcement actually means – because tariffs are part of an extremely complicated system. But despite all this, what I’d say – what I see, what’s obvious to me at first glance – is that this isn’t an agreement. President Donald Trump didn’t conclude an agreement with Ursula von der Leyen; Donald Trump ate Ursula von der Leyen for breakfast. That’s what happened! We suspected this in advance, because the American president is a heavyweight negotiator, while the Commission president is a featherweight. What’s more, the US president’s position is much more secure, while that of the President of the Commission is always more fragile – but I’ll say a few words about that later. What I can also say with certainty is that the Americans recently concluded a similar tariff agreement with the British. That one is much better than this one. So the European agreement is worse than the British one. This is why it will be difficult to present it as a success later on. On top of this, there’s the problem that they’ve allegedly agreed to transfer hundreds of billions of euros of capital from Europe to America.
That’s right.
But who? The Commission has no capital. On whose behalf did it agree to this? Will the German chancellor take the money there, or will the French president or the Hungarian prime minister send capital to America? How is this supposed to work? I don’t see it. The other thing is that we’re supposedly going to buy weapons for hundreds of billions of dollars. But who? Because the Commission has no army, and it can’t buy anything. Who’s going to buy it? So the position of the Commission president in such negotiations is, as I’ve said, fragile. So President Trump didn’t just eat von der Leyen because he has a bigger and better appetite and because he’s a better negotiator, which is obvious, but because...
Von der Leyen said, and I’ve found it: the President is “a tough negotiator, but he is also a dealmaker”.
I’m afraid that when von der Leyen says that, her voice is coming out from Donald Trump’s stomach. So from the outset the positions weren’t equal, and the Commission president had a difficult task. But I can say that the United Kingdom left the European Union, which we’ve said was the worst possible decision. But although it left, now it’s concluded an agreement with the Americans that’s much better than the EU’s agreement with them. So who’s to blame now?
There’s another part, and of course we have to wait for the exact breakdown, but from a Hungarian perspective what may be important is that she’s also made a commitment to purchase energy.
The same thing. But who’s going to buy that energy? First of all, von der Leyen can’t buy that much, because she doesn’t have a house that big: Brussels can’t buy it, because that amount could heat Brussels a thousand times over, and so it doesn’t need it. It’s the Member States that will have to buy it. And there who will buy it? In most countries it’s not the state that buys it, but private companies. So how will that work?
It’s 7:52 a.m., and this is Fight Hour. We’re exposing fake news and confronting those who spread it with the truth – that’s our important mission. From now on, we’ll be here on Monday through Thursday, every morning from 7:30 a.m., live on Facebook and YouTube. And then every broadcast will be posted uncut, so you don’t have to watch it live – but the more people there are who watch it live, the happier we’ll be. When Viktor Orbán isn’t here with me, other well-known politicians, experts and opinion leaders will be joining us. It will be worth watching those shows as well, and we look forward to your comments on any social media platform or by email. We have an email address, harcosokoraja2026@gmail.com, where you can send photos and videos, which we’ll be browsing through and showing. At the beginning we talked about how coarse the tone has become, especially on social media. Let me show you a message. I received this while we were at Tusványos, and I could show you hundreds more like it. But the point isn’t that I received it, but that nationalist people on the Right receive similar messages. Someone named Bence Tamás Kiss asks this: “Do they spit on you in the street, you worthless piece of shit? I hope they drag you out of your car and hang you from the embankment.” What can be done about this? Where’s the limit? And where did things go wrong to get us to this point?
First, let’s rush to the assistance of Tamás Bence...
Bence Tamás Kiss.
...because Hungarian is a difficult language. So you can’t hang anyone from the embankment...
I guess he meant from a lamppost on the embankment.
On the embankment, yes, but that’s a different matter. I’m just saying we shouldn’t take things like this too seriously. On the other hand, we should treat the matter with some seriousness. For example, it’s an intriguing legal question as to whether this is already a criminal offence, whether it’s outside the bounds of legality, whether it counts as online aggression – because that’s not allowed. So today there’s a law that prohibits behaviour on the internet that’s aimed at violence or humiliating the dignity of others. That’s my parenthetical remark. I don’t see that this system is working very well. It would be worth reviewing whether this legislation has lived up to expectations. This is perhaps more a matter for the judiciary and the police than it is for me. Returning to the heart of the matter. The following is how it works. I initiated the creation of digital civic circles because today the internet, or this online space, is hostile territory. So a non-libby, non-leftist person goes online and expresses their opinion, as you did, and that very moment they get a dozen of these kinds of thing. This is nothing other than online aggression. And I think that if this has become such an important part of our lives, if the digital space has become such an important part of our lives, then we mustn’t submit to this tone and to these people. So we have to go there too. I call it a digital conquest of the homeland. There must also be room in this space for civil, national, normal, peaceful – even humble – people who genuinely want only good; and it’s important for them to be able to defend themselves against aggression. No one can defend themselves alone, because there will be dozens against them. And then a hundred more jeering characters come along, and God knows what coarse things will happen. We can only be confident and feel good in the online space if we protect one another.
I repeat, it’s not important to me that I received this. What makes one incensed is that the same kind of thing is being received by many people who stand up for the values of the Right.
Everyone’s getting this.
Everyone. From my perspective I can handle it well, because I’ve been receiving this for more than ten years. You obviously handle it even better, because you’ve been receiving it for much longer. But it’s clear that because of this there are those who won’t go out onto the battlefield.
That’s why they retain me, right? So I’m a fighter. The reason a country has a prime minister is to have someone who fights in the international arena on behalf of the people and on certain important issues at home. The people themselves don’t want to live like that – you can’t live like that. So those who say, “I’d rather keep quiet and not go there” are right. But if you don’t go there and tell the truth, you lose the opportunity that the internet offers – it’s not only a danger but also an opportunity. And if you yield everything, then this civic, national, nation-building attitude and thinking will be pushed out of this space. That would be a great loss for the country, and politically disadvantageous for us.
Let’s take a look at digital civic circle number one...
Yes, let’s!
...their web page.
I’m sure they’ve been fiercely attacked as well.
This is something that came to a head on Saturday at the end of the speech in Tusványos, and it’s been happening continuously since then. They’re the founding members, of course, and they too have been attacked in recent days – sometimes personally, sometimes generally.
So we had to get the whole thing started somehow. When we were organising civic circles with Imre Makovecz a long time ago, we had to get that started somehow too. So you need a first civic circle, and then the whole thing will take off, it will take on a life of its own, and start to build itself. It’s a very interesting phenomenon, by the way: how people suddenly get energy, become emboldened, take courage, and realise that this space really mustn’t be given up.
And by the way, there’s a platform where organisers are already being accepted, so anyone who wants to start their own digital civic circle can apply.
That’s right, so we ask anyone who wants to participate in a digital civic circle to apply, and then they’ll receive all kinds of information and updates about which circles are already operating and what topics they cover. But there are also those who don’t want to join a civic circle, but who want to organise a civic circle. They also register, receive assistance, and then form civic circles. There are already more than six hundred of them. Now, it’s usually the case that 10 per cent are provocateurs, meaning that they’re not serious or have been sent by the “enemy”. So, you always have to deduct about 10 per cent. The rest are serious. And this isn’t insignificant, because if 540 out of 600 people have registered to form a civic circle, then soon we’ll have 540 civic circles. I don’t know of any other civil society organisation in Hungary that has so many local groups.
There are a thousand walking clubs for pensioners, and they’re important too...
So that’s the yardstick.
What will happen in practice in these circles?
Yes, who does what? For example, yesterday I spoke with people from Budapest who don’t yet know what they’ll be called, but they want to create a civic circle called “Let’s redesign or rethink Budapest”; because they see that Budapest is stuck in mundane debates that may be important, but they rob the city of its ability to look at itself and formulate larger-scale plans. So they have a city concept and suburban zone in mind, and I’ve spoken to people who are immediately setting up a civic circle of the “reorganize and rethink Budapest” type. And there are quite a few – including former athletes – who want something completely different. So there will be everything here, and you’ll see how rich and colourful civic life is. But one thing is clear: these civic circles will be made up of people who are patriotic, who care about their country, who don’t want to destroy it but to build it, and who want it to have a future.
Join us, the more the better! Can you stay a little longer? Half an hour’s passed, but if we don’t get kicked out by the programme organizer, I’d be happy if we could stay...
We’ll find out at the end.
Because a sensible comment has arrived. I have a colleague named Kati, who’s like Columbo’s wife, collecting comments from behind the camera. She sent the following: “I’m a young right-wing woman, which is why I’m following you now. I moved out of my parents’ house a year and a half ago, I don’t have a husband yet, and having children seems very far away. But I’ve seen that there’s this 3 per cent loan. Is it worth getting?” So, no children, no husband, young, not living at home, and interested in the 3 per cent loan.
American real estate agents usually respond to prospective buyers who ask when they should buy a home by saying that they should have done so five years ago. So all I can say to this lady is that I’m certain it’s better to have your own home than not to have one. And now she has the opportunity to have her own home if she wants it. The opportunity is there, the path is open, if she wants it, and she can go ahead. All I can say is that if you don’t live with your parents, or don’t want to live with your parents, then you have to find a place to rent and pay rent. This means that this money is effectively taken out of your monthly budget as a housing overhead. How much more sensible it is to pay the same amount as a mortgage payment for your own home than simply as rent! So I recommend that anyone who wants their own home should look at the information about the Home Start programme. This is a great opportunity. There’s nothing like it in Europe, so if anyone thinks that this is no big deal, I’d like to point out that, as far as I know, there’s nothing like it in Europe today: when you turn 18 and become an adult, you have the opportunity to leave home, gather all your savings – you only need 10 per cent – and then you get a state-guaranteed, fixed loan at 3 per cent, which is the same as rent or a private rental lease, or even less. And you’ll have your own home. If you ask someone who, say, goes to Germany in the hope of finding work and earning money there, if they work hard and they’re very thrifty, then they might be able to save up something. But the chances of them ever buying a flat for themselves in Germany are extremely slim. I’m not saying they’re zero, but they’re extremely slim. I hope this works. It starts on 1 September, and if it succeeds and young people are really interested and want to pursue this path, then we’ll be the first country in Europe to make it possible for young people coming of age to have their own home – not just in theory, but in practice.
Since my wife, our two daughters and I struggled all through the “foreign currency loans, forint conversion, increased repayment instalments” maze or labyrinth, when I saw this measure, and, I wrote, very Facebook-like, “Wow” – because we’re on Facebook. This is an amazing opportunity for young people.
And there’s another opportunity here, of course. Hungarians are clever, and they’ll come up with all kinds of solutions. If there’s a middle-aged couple who, say, own a property, and only 50 per cent of it belongs to one and 50 per cent to the other, then according to this rule, as soon as the entire Home Start programme starts, they can also buy their own apartment. If only one of them buys, then one child is taken care of; if both buy, then in terms of their future housing two children are taken care of. So this is very important for young people, but there are also many average married couples who can find or see this as a means of helping their own children get started.
Let’s return to the agitators. One of the main agitators on this issue – and others – is 24.hu. Over the weekend, they wrote about Home Start, home loans – and it’s not only them, but for a week or two now, there’s been a campaign against the measure. They wrote the following: “Due to the 3 per cent loan, homes could become so expensive that, according to the experts, we’ll hardly gain anything.” As we discussed earlier, when someone writes “according to the experts”, it tries to suggest that all experts say that this scheme is bad. If the word “the” was omitted, then there would be some experts who think it’s bad. So what they wrote there is a lie from the outset, because there are certainly experts who think it’s good.
You’ve revealed a very subtle sleight of hand, but it’s an outrageous statement. Incidentally, the fear isn’t unfounded, so it’s a legitimate question to ask what effect a new home purchase scheme will have on house prices. That’s a sensible question.
You’re not exactly new to this.
But we’re aware of this, because this isn’t our first home creation programme. That’s why Home Start is a loan for which the price per square metre is specified in the legislation. It can only be used for properties for which the price per square metre doesn’t exceed one and a half million forints. Consequently, the price of the property can’t increase. So – how should I put it? – this expert, or these experts, should have their credentials checked.
Yes, there’s another expert on the screen now. The political scientist Gábor Török has been messaging you. He sent a message after your speech in Tusványos, responding to the opening remarks of your speech, when you said that – according to your current knowledge and the internal polls of the ruling parties – Fidesz–KDNP candidates would win 80 of the 106 individual constituencies. This would mean a landslide victory in the 2026 election. Gábor Török writes, and of course this appears in many places, that the arithmetic is faulty, because this isn’t what the surveys of institutes close to the Government actually show. Can we sort out this polling battle? Almost every day there are reports that the opposition is sure to win a two-thirds majority. You regularly refer to surveys that show the opposite. What I’ve seen of internal surveys is that the Government has the upper hand, but you obviously see much more.
What do unsuspecting ordinary Hungarians think? They think that when they see a poll, it reflects the situation at the time the poll was conducted. But in that they’re seriously mistaken, because – as we know from [liberal pollster] Endre Hann himself – some polls are campaign tools. I read in an interview he gave that they learned this from the Americans. And it’s true. We also learned it from the Americans. This practice exists, as they explained to us: certain polls and the interpretation of the numbers give room for manoeuvre; and if a party pays a pollster, then in the Western world they’re shamelessly willing to interpret the numbers in such a way that whoever reads them sees that the results or the power dynamics are clearly shifting to or favouring one side. In the world of pollsters there’s even a technical term to describe this type of research. And based on this, researchers are then labelled as right-wing or left-wing research institutes – depending on in whose favour they interpret the numbers, rather than how the numbers would naturally suggest. But I don’t care about any of that. I’m not interested in what Gábor Török says, or what the numbers of right-wing or left-wing institutes show. It’s an interesting debate, an interesting discussion, but it has no significance. I can only go by what we’ve measured ourselves. I’m not claiming that it’s flawless, but for several decades we’ve had a method of measurement, whereby we gauge public opinion and ask people various questions. These are usually specific questions, including political and party issues, as well as general preference-related matters. And this is what I was talking about. We now see that this is the situation, this is where we stand. And the arithmetic works out in our favour.
We were in Tusványos, of course, where we asked how motivated young people are now, at least the supporters of Fidesz–KDNP: young people and those who have been young for a longer time. We asked if the elections were held now, would they vote? We’ll show an extremely short video, and then we’ll continue.
Video clip: “A crushing Fidesz victory.” “We’ll write it on the boards again that the Fidesz–KDNP alliance won with a two-thirds majority, so come on, team! We’re going to win.” “My answer is clear: a straightforward home win.” “There will be a lot of work to do, it won’t be easy, but I think that if everyone does their job, we can only expect success.” “We’ll win, that’s clear. It’s clear.”
Balázs Németh: Clear.
There’s a recurring myth about young people. It comes up before every election.
Shall I show you some “filthy Fidesz” stuff?
Sure, let’s see it!
Let’s see it, since we’re in Fight Hour. Can I play it? I’ll play it.
Video playback: “Filthy Fidesz! Filthy Fidesz! Filthy Fidesz!”
Not convincing.
Balázs Németh: I wanted to say that the agitators, the full-time agitators, have been saying for weeks that everyone here is shouting “Filthy Fidesz” – but I don’t see it in the public mood. And besides, if I start filming with a camera and six or eight people are shouting next to me, it looks as if there were six or eight thousand of them. This happens very often when people on stage start doing this. So I wouldn’t dare say that all young people think Fidesz is filthy.
The same goes for rallies. The news talks about huge rallies. I usually ask my colleagues to send up a drone if possible, so we can see it from above. And then it turns out that this huge, enormous growth of the opposition, or whatever it is, is actually just small, tiny groups – but if you photograph it from eye level, it looks good. That’s by the way. Back to young people! I say that the internet is dangerous because it distorts reality to a greater extent than anyone would think. So there’s this myth about young people. Why is that? It’s because one of the most uncertain – and therefore most manipulable – elements in polls is whether young people will turn out and vote. We know that older people vote. So it’s a proven fact, common knowledge, that the older someone is, the more likely they are to vote in elections. It’s interesting to consider why this is the case, but it is. And since it’s impossible to know how many young people will turn out to vote, if a pollster says that they’ll all turn out, then that shows a different number, compared to if only as many turn out as last time – or even fewer. So this is why it’s easier to manipulate opinion polls and the final results – or to cover up small manipulations – by including young people. This is why young people are always brought up, and then it’s a big mystery how many will turn out. And if they all turn out, then of course the ruling parties can kiss their chances goodbye, but these are – how should I put it? – low-level tricks.
I’ve received a comment through Kati, which is very Facebook-style. “Why is the lead fighter a coward? Péter Magyar has called him out for a debate again.” I assume they called you...
First of all, it’s an honour. I have a clear position. I don’t debate with people who are on others’ payrolls. I don’t go on shows like that either. So wherever I see that journalists or the media are being paid from abroad, I don’t go there. I go to everyone else, by the way – I don’t care if they’re on the Right or on the Left. If I think I’m talking to the person sitting opposite me, like you now, for example, then I’ll go. But if I have to think about who paid them, who’s behind them, what they want, and whose interests their questions actually serve, then I won’t go there – because it kills the discussion, misleads the viewer, and so on. It’s the same in politics. I’m happy to talk to everyone, and I do so regularly in Parliament, but I won’t debate with those who I know are clearly in the pay of foreign powers, because my debate is with their masters. So I’m interested in the puppeteer, not the puppet. I don’t know how many times Péter Magyar will challenge me, but he’ll always get the same answer: my debate is with his masters, the puppeteers who control him: von der Leyen, Mr. Weber, and quite a few European bureaucrats. And I debate with them every week.
Let’s take a look at this puppet show. In this regard I think Saturday was very instructive. You gave your customary speech at Tusványos and reiterated that Hungary will be strong and great if it follows the Hungarian path, if it decides its own destiny, if it stands up for its interests. At the same time, Péter Magyar, as the leader of the largest opposition force, held a rally in Székesfehérvár. I collected together what the liberal portals that support him wrote about that speech: “Péter Magyar rejected Orbán’s constant trolling, vetoing, and wrecking tactics.” This was reported by 444.hu. And on telex.hu a liberal expert jubilantly declared that “Péter Magyar spoke as one would expect a European politician to speak. Finally, a Western-friendly politician.” I think that on Saturday it became clear once again that there will be a choice between two distinct paths and two distinct camps.
This is a difficult situation, Balázs, and I don’t want to talk about it for too long. I remember that until a year and a half ago, Péter Magyar would be cheering, clapping and shouting hurrahs in the front row at all my speeches and presentations. That was for the Hungarian way, which now is supposedly not good, and so he’s proclaiming something else. So what am I supposed to make of this? Honestly! If we take this seriously...
If we look at the danger...
If we take it seriously, then I see the migration pact as the greatest danger. So if today someone says that they’re a European politician and they want compromise, agreement, and reconciliation with the Commission, then the prerequisite for that is their acceptance of the migration pact – and I think Tisza accepts the migration pact. They’re talking about this, by the way – you just need to listen carefully. The migration pact means that we’ll immediately have to build refugee camps for tens of thousands of people here. This obligation already exists, but we’re not implementing it, and we have to accept that if many migrants arrive in Europe, it won’t be us that decides who and how many come here to Hungary, but Brussels. So the migration pact would mean the end of Hungary. And politicians who consider themselves European are willing to take this risk – which isn’t really a risk, because we can see how Western Europe has been ruined, and they’re willing to ruin the country. So I’ll come to an agreement with Brussels on everything. I won’t poke a stick between the spokes, and I’m happy to agree with Brussels on every issue – but every agreement must be good for Hungary. It mustn’t result in gender propaganda in schools, it mustn’t result in us being pushed into war, it mustn’t result in our money being sent to Ukraine, and an agreement with Brussels mustn’t result in us letting in migrants. So those who push for this kind of europäisch, bien-pensant compromise and conciliatory rhetoric will actually be ruining Hungary. We need to reach an agreement with Brussels – not from a position of self-sacrifice, however, but from a position of national interest. It’s easy to agree when you sacrifice yourself: you get a pat on the back, they let you into the salon, they write five articles about you, but your country is ruined. This must not be done! Of course it may be uncomfortable to have to stand alone from time to time against more than twenty prime ministers, but that’s okay. In the end we’ll reach an agreement – so far we’ve always reached an agreement.
Two news items are related to this. Yesterday, while browsing the website of [the Hungarian press agency] MTI, I read that police in Berlin had to break up a pro-Palestinian demonstration attended by thousands of people, which turned violent – resulting in 57 arrests. A few days earlier, European rabbis were given the opportunity to participate in self-defence training in the Netherlands, as the security situation in Western Europe has deteriorated to such an extent that rabbis dare not go out on the streets. So what we’re talking about is happening in practice, and we’re very fortunate that we’re not facing this in Hungary – except when we think of the scenes ten years ago at Keleti railway station in Budapest.
Yes. Perhaps this is related to the news from two or three days ago when President Macron announced that France will recognise the Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. I bring this up now because there are two dimensions to migration.
I’m happy when we talk about serious issues.
There’s the first aspect we talked about: terror, crime, the fact that they take your country away from you, and your sense of home is gone before you’ve even noticed what’s happened. This is what’s happening in Western Europe. But there are times when democracy meets migration, and this has consequences that we don’t often think about. Let’s put the French president to one side for now. When democracy meets migration, it means that by letting migrants in, you’ve already given them certain rights. The longer they stay in your country, the more rights you give them, and in the end they’ll also receive citizenship: they’ll become voters. And if the proportion or number of Muslim voters in a Western European country is greater than the number of Jewish voters, then the Government will certainly pursue a pro-Palestinian and pro-Islamic policy.
That’s how the arithmetic works out.
That’s how the arithmetic works out. That’s democracy. And then Jews can pack their bags – and that’s what’s happening now. This is happening in many Western European countries – in France, too. I have statistics on how many thousands or tens of thousands of citizens of Jewish origin have left each country and moved to other countries. The whole of Europe is suffering from this.
Is there a developed Hungarian position on the recognition of an independent Palestinian state?
Of course. When we talk about an independent Palestinian state we imagine two states, side by side: two states that accept each other and live side by side. But today neither of these exists, because Israel doesn’t want a two-state solution. As long as neither exists, there’s nothing to talk about. So I think that keeping the two-state solution on the agenda hinders the agreements that could be reached. It’s keeping on the agenda an illusion that reduces or excludes cooperation under the current circumstances. So I’m cautious about this.
But it’s come up again. Okay, there’s one month of summer left, and we can pretty much end our discussions – there’s one month left of summer, and it’s great that we can go on vacation, or that many people can go on vacation. But this reinforces the idea that we can’t sit back and relax, because this summer is hot – politically, security-wise, and in all kinds of ways.
If I may answer this personally, I also tend to go on vacation at the end of July or the beginning of August, if I have the chance. But this is the kind of summer when I can do that maybe in the second half of August, after the celebrations on the 20th, and maybe a day or two before that; but definitely only in the second half of August, because that’s when the Brussels bureaucrats go on vacation, and then I hope that the pressure and heat in politics and on politics will subside. It’s then that I’ll be able to go away for a few days. So really, quite simply, I couldn’t allow myself to go on vacation even if I wanted to. Because this summer is truly different: it’s a hot summer – a long, hot summer.
One more little joke at the end.
Yes?
I don’t even know why Lajos Korózs’s post caught my eye.
Oh!
The vice president of the MSZP [Hungarian Socialist Party]?
Well, we don’t know anymore.
The MSZP still exists, as it turns out. Over the weekend he posted about the online civic circles, laughing and chuckling, saying that Viktor Orbán couldn’t think of anything else to come up with, because he doesn’t have much time left. “On Monday, Nokia phones will be distributed to members of the civic circles”, he announced. And I guess the Nokia 1011 had push buttons – so in other words he’s laughing at everyone who feels it’s worth joining a community that’s building the country.
Look...
And there were many similar messages, comments, posts...
Well...
And there were many similar messages, comments, posts...
Obviously, I can’t know everyone in the online world, but I do know Mr. Lajos Korózs, because he’s a fellow Member of Parliament. I enjoy talking to him about serious matters, but the starting point for this conversation is still that he’s on the Left, which is disappearing: drying up like the morning dew. So, if I were in his shoes, I wouldn’t be trying to wipe my feet on the nationalist community of the Right, which has a two-thirds majority and is on the up electorally – I wouldn’t be mocking them, but I’d perhaps be thinking about what’s become of my community. Because it may be precisely this mocking tone and attitude that’s led to the Left in Hungary slowly disappearing from the map. So: go for it, Lajos Korózs! The best of success to you!
My colleagues are asking if you have eight more minutes so that we can fill the full 60 minutes.
Of course! Since we’re already here...
Then I can provide some more topics. One of the tasks of the Fight Hour is to amplify the good news, the positive news. Fortunately, thanks to a comment, we’ve just been talking about the 3 per cent loan. In Tusványos, you also listed the measures affecting young people, families and the elderly, with which the Hungarian government is helping the everyday lives of people living here. And in personal discussions or meetings I often hear pro-government voters ask why you or the Government’s politicians don’t talk more about everything that’s happened, all the positive things that have happened over the past fifteen years – despite COVID, or the war, or all the many other problems.
There’s a strange saying in politics that goes, “What already exists doesn’t exist.” This means that what’s already happened, what’s already known as good news, no longer interests people – or they don’t attach any political significance to it. So the fact that roads are being built, bridges are working, and there’s a family support system in place is taken for granted and no longer considered to be a political achievement. This is why politicians have to be very careful about how much they want to talk about what already exists, which people already consider to be in the past, and how much they want to talk about their plans. It’s a difficult issue. Because at the same time, if you have no achievements to back you up, why should people trust you? So it’s a complicated game. If I had the time and could found one I would, but I hope that there will be a civic circle of pride, which, using modern IT tools, would be concerned with presenting everything that’s happened in this country that we can be proud of. I wouldn’t make this about the Government, because the Government is a different matter, but about the homeland, about the country. After all, it’s not possible for the Government to be unsuccessful and the country to be successful – or for the country to be successful and the Government to be unsuccessful. So there’s a uniformity: we’re either successful together or unsuccessful together. When we had a bad government, the whole country was unsuccessful. And I could name periods and names. So I think it would be good if more was spoken about what we can be proud of; but this is hardly to be expected from politicians, who have to deal with challenges, problems and difficulties rather than achievements. This is why I tend to translate this for myself by asking what the good news is.
Let me give you an example...
So if you want to say that your government has done a good job and achieved something, well, no one will care. On the other hand, you can say, “Folks, we’ve made some decisions that will open up opportunities for you. For example, there’s Home Start, but there are others too. Lifetime tax exemption for women who have had at least two children. This is an opportunity that’s open to everyone. Go ahead, it’s yours, give it a try!” So if you talk about things in a way that means you’re not actually talking about yourself, but about people, about the opportunities you’re creating for them, then suddenly they’ll accept the good news. But if you start talking about how the Government has done this and that, they’ll stop listening. That’s modern politics.
I was talking to a father younger than me, whose oldest child is now starting elementary school. He didn’t even remember that parents used to have to pay for textbooks.
Of course!
Free textbooks are so natural...
Of course. And free meals.
...that he doesn’t even know. Young people under the age of 25 don’t even remember that a few years ago, when they weren’t yet in the labour market, young people had to pay income tax.
But that’s how this profession works. In some ways it’s unfair, but that’s okay, because what matters is not that politics is fair to politicians, but that it’s good for the people. So I could consider it a painful injustice that they forget what’s already been achieved, don’t take it into account, and don’t consider it. But I don’t see it that way. Instead, I see it as inspiration, like saying, “Little fella, stop talking and preaching about how well you did: talk about what lies ahead.” This is the fuel, the engine, the drive, the momentum that carries politics forward. It may seem unfair from my perspective, but from the country’s perspective the fact that it’s like that isn’t a problem.
Perhaps we can do that much, or politics could shed light on it. We here at Fight Hour will definitely do that: draw attention to what...
Well, that’s a more serious matter.
...stands to be lost by those who say that another government should come to power. They don’t care what happens to the tax system, whether there will be a multi-rate income tax system again, and they don’t care if tax breaks for families with children are abolished.
Yes.
There’s the Tisza Party’s LGBTQ-friendly ideologue, who says that tax breaks for families with children are unfair.
Of course. I live in Buda, and to be honest I’m shocked. Things are bad in Buda. There are a lot of wealthy people, and somehow it doesn’t occur to them, or it’s not important to them, that if there isn’t a civic government, then in no time at all they’ll pay two or three times as much tax as they do now. And if I’ve heard correctly, they’ll also have to pay wealth tax. There are the houses they live in, and on those they’ll pay so much wealth tax that they’ll turn purple with rage. So I hope that before the election there will be a few weeks when the noise of the war horns subsides, or people can withdraw and do their calculations. They have a lot to lose. If the economic system weren’t what it is now, families would be in big trouble, owning a home would be out of the question, the minimum wage wouldn’t be what it is, and the middle class would be bearing burdens similar to those under the Gyurcsány government. Because although the opposition always talks – as Gyurcsány and his colleagues did – about how the rich will pay, in the end the reality is always that it’s the citizens, the middle class, who will pay, because that’s where the large masses are, and that’s where a lot of money can be collected. So we mustn’t be swayed by the siren song that they’ll tax the rich heavily and then everything will be fine. No, in the end those who pay won’t be the rich, who everywhere in the world can protect themselves against this, but the middle class. This is worth thinking about; but the election is still a long way off, so perhaps this is too serious and difficult a topic.
Is it far off?
Eight months.
And there’s still work to be done until then. You usually say how much. What percentage of your working time do you spend on campaign preparation?
Right now I’m spending 10 per cent of my time on campaign matters and 90 per cent on governing. As we move forward that will change, and in the end the ratio will be exactly reversed.
So you were here for an hour, then nine more hours...
When I can govern, yes.
...for you to deal with governing. Thank you very much for coming.
Thank you for having me.
I hope you’ll come back on Fight Hour. We’ll definitely be here every Monday through Thursday from now on – but when there’s a particularly exciting period we’ll also be here live on Facebook and YouTube on other days and at other times. Feel free to send in your comments, and we’ll respond to them. We’ll continue tomorrow morning at 7:30 a.m. Thank you very much for your attention. Thank you very much.
Thank you for inviting me.