Putin’s Puppet Project in Peril
But I suggest you start by reading pieces that explain why the puppets are so worried, such as this post describing how Orbán has floated the British far right. At an event in 2015, it describes, historian Niall Ferguson wondered whether Hungary could offer the antidote for societal decline.
With a nod to the upcoming Brexit referendum in his native land, Ferguson wondered aloud whether Budapest was “the perfect place to ask the question: What is Europe in the 21st century?”
A decade later, Viktor Orbán has answered that question in ways Ferguson probably didn’t anticipate. Using Hungarian public money – funnelled through legally insulated foundations partly funded by Russian oil revenues – Orbán has built a cross-border network of populist right think tanks, journalists and activists.
[snip]
The Scruton Foundation’s funding comes from something called the Mathias Corvinus Collegium. Described as Orbán’s ‘pet university’, the MCC’s chair, Balázs Orbán – Viktor’s political director, no relation – has said: “It is our goal for Hungary to become an intellectual powerhouse, in which MCC plays a key role.”
The MCC funds a sprawling network of think tanks, publications, fellowships and summits all pushing a radical right agenda – all bankrolled by the Hungarian government.
The sums involved are remarkable. Founded in 1996 as a modest educational institution for talented Hungarian students, MCC was significantly enlarged in 2020 when Hungary’s Fidesz-majority National Assembly transferred to it 10% stakes in two of Hungary’s largest companies – energy firm MOL and drugmaker Gedeon Richter – along with $462 million in cash and $9 million worth of property. The combined endowment was valued at a whopping $1.7 billion: nearly 1% of Hungary’s Gross Domestic Product.Much of this cash comes from Russian oil.
If Peter Magyar can beat Orbán on Sunday, he has promised to defund much of this network.
[Magyar’s party’s] election programme commits explicitly to recovering MCC’s state assets and ending the practice of using public funds to build political networks.
“Taxpayers’ money can only be spent on education, research and genuine, merit-based talent development. We will draw a clear line between education and propaganda,” the opposition has said.
But unpicking Orbán’s network of radical right influence might prove easier said than done. Magyar would need a two-thirds parliamentary majority to alter the governance of foundations like the Danube Institute and MCC.
But even a simple majority would likely mean fellowship contracts not being renewed and budgets for London events and media outlets being reduced. The Roger Scruton Legacy Foundation would need to find alternative sources for the £500,000-plus it receives annually from MCC.
Summary
The piece argues that Hungary has become the nerve center of a broader political project linking Viktor Orbán, Vladimir Putin, and key figures in the U.S. aligned with Donald Trump. Over the past decade, Orbán has used state resources—partly fueled by Russian energy money—to build an international network of media, think tanks, and political operatives designed to export a very specific model: one where power is centralized, opposition is weakened, and democratic rules are bent to keep those in charge in power.
This is not abstract. In Hungary, it has meant restricting press freedom, rewriting election rules, undermining courts, and directing public money to political allies. The result is what many describe as an “electoral autocracy”—a system where elections still exist, but outcomes are increasingly shaped by control of the system itself. That means less accountability, fewer real choices, and a government that becomes harder to remove no matter how it governs. (Sound familiar?)
What makes this more alarming is how directly this model is now being embraced by influential figures in the United States. Organizations like the Heritage Foundation and initiatives such as Project 2025 are described as adapting key elements of Orbán’s approach—using government power to reshape institutions, reward allies, and sideline opposition.
And then there is J. D. Vance. His relationship with Orbán goes well beyond routine diplomacy. He has met with him privately, appeared alongside him politically, and spoken favorably about his system. But Orbán’s model is not just “conservative governance”—it openly challenges core democratic principles like independent courts, a free press, and limits on executive power. Supporting that model is, in effect, endorsing a version of politics where winning justifies rewriting the rules.
Layered over all of this is Russia’s role. The article points to financial ties linked to Russian energy, diplomatic coordination, and consistent alignment with Moscow’s interests. But the deeper issue isn’t just influence—it’s alignment. The same network Orbán has built advances positions that benefit the Kremlin: weakening Western alliances, reducing support for Ukraine, and promoting a worldview where strongman leadership replaces democratic accountability.
The United States is now, at least in part, led by political forces increasingly comfortable aligning with—and learning from—governments that suppress dissent, manipulate elections, and concentrate power. At the same time, those same forces are stepping back from supporting Ukraine, a democratic country defending itself against Russian invasion. That represents a fundamental shift in what the U.S. stands for on the global stage.
At the center of this moment is Hungary’s election, where opposition leader Péter Magyar has pledged to dismantle much of Orbán’s state-funded political machine. If Orbán loses, it doesn’t just disrupt power in Hungary—it threatens a broader system built to spread this model internationally. If he wins, it reinforces it.
The article’s point is stark: the election is not just about Hungary. It’s about whether a model built on centralized power, political loyalty, and weakened democratic safeguards continues to expand. For anyone who values rule of law, fair elections, and basic political freedom, that’s not abstract. It’s a direct challenge to the system they live under.
