If you have any doubt that America is close to becoming a Christofascist country, this clip of paid Russian propaganda pusher Benny Johnson’s speech from the Charlie Kirk memorial should erase that doubt.
This is not what America is supposed to be.
Scary shit. pic.twitter.com/5jlvwyIVaY— Lincoln Square (@LincolnSquareHQ) September 22, 2025
Lincoln Square’s assessment is a textbook example of hyperpartisan fear-mongering that collapses under scrutiny. Their characterization reveals more about their own ideological blindness than any legitimate threat to American democracy.
1. The “Christofascist” Label is Historically Illiterate
Fascism has specific historical characteristics: ultranationalism, totalitarian control, suppression of opposition, and the subordination of individual rights to state power. Johnson’s speech advocates for the opposite—limited government that protects individual rights and allows peaceful disagreement. “I want to live in a country where the good and the faithful and the moral people of our nation can live in peace, debate in peace, disagree in peace, and start families in peace.”
This is classical liberalism, not fascism. Lincoln Square cheapens the memory of actual fascism victims by throwing around this term so carelessly.
2. The “Russian Propaganda” Red Herring
Ad hominem attacks don’t refute arguments. Even if Johnson has problematic associations (which would need verification), dismissing biblical theology as “Russian propaganda” is intellectually dishonest. Are we to believe Romans 13 is a Kremlin creation? This lazy guilt-by-association fallacy avoids engaging with the substance of what Johnson actually said.
3. Constitutional Ignorance on Religion’s Role
Lincoln Square’s shock at religious language in political discourse betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of American history. The same Constitution that protects religious freedom has always allowed—indeed, expected—religious perspectives in public debate. From abolitionists citing Scripture against slavery to civil rights leaders invoking biblical justice, American reform movements have consistently drawn on religious authority.
4. Misrepresenting Traditional Governance Theory
Johnson’s invocation of Romans 13 isn’t revolutionary—it’s how Western civilization has understood legitimate authority for centuries. When he speaks of rulers wielding “the sword for the protection of good men and for the terror of evil men,” he’s describing basic law enforcement. Should we not want criminals to fear justice? Should we not want law-abiding citizens protected?
5. The Real Authoritarianism
The truly concerning authoritarianism comes from Lincoln Square’s position: that certain theological perspectives should be excluded from public discourse entirely. That’s what “America is not supposed to be”—a country where particular religious viewpoints are deemed inherently illegitimate in civic life.
6. Missing the Actual Message
Johnson explicitly calls for peaceful coexistence and legitimate governmental authority. Lincoln Square’s hysterical reaction suggests they either didn’t listen to the actual content or are deliberately mischaracterizing it for political gain. Neither reflects serious journalism.
Lincoln Square’s assessment isn’t analysis—it’s partisan performance art designed to generate clicks and outrage. Their inability to distinguish between mainstream religious political thought and actual extremism reveals the very ideological tunnel vision that makes productive democratic discourse impossible.
A truly dangerous development would be allowing such inflammatory mischaracterizations to shut down legitimate religious voices in American political life.