A little over six minutes was the span of time it took Meryl Streep to captivate an entire nation at the 2017 Golden Globes.

In praise of the press, Hollywood and the diversity of our nation, her speech was eloquent and thoughtful. It certainly redirected our attention, even though the speech’s topic had already been discussed at just about every family dinner table in the U.S.

Streep began her speech with a thank you to the round of applause the audience gave her, and with little airtime her speech went to work breaking down barriers. Singling out the “top dogs” of Hollywood’s society, Streep made those who were lionized into royalty look like normal human beings.

She later went on to discuss the privilege granted to that group, which certainly includes herself. Streep’s privilege as an actor can be abused greatly — which many others have done in the past — but it can also be used to deliver great speeches like this.

“We have to remind each other of the privilege and the responsibility of the act of empathy,” Streep said, reflecting on her and her peers’ obligation to do good with their publicity — contrary to the misguided belief that, to celebrities, public image is everything.

The subject of obligation didn’t end there. In her speech, Streep held the press to higher standards — to communicate the truth and nothing but the truth, and to exercise our constitutional right to free speech.

Did someone hear Trump? Our new president mocked a disabled reporter in November 2015; Streep, once on the subject of the press, wasn’t about to let the audience forget it. Needless to say, her conclusion on Trump was simply elementary logic with a punch: “And this instinct to humiliate, when it’s modeled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody’s life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing… When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.”

This is where the Golden Globes got controversial. Though there are people like myself who reacted positively to Streep’s speech, many said that it wasn’t in her place to turn political and bash the president-elect at the time. But I disagree.

I mentioned earlier that Streep and all her celeb friends have a responsibility to use their privilege and publicity wisely, and that’s exactly what she did. I understand that it can be repetitive or inappropriate to constantly vent frustration about Trump. But Streep’s speech deviated from the norm — that is, widespread hatred and paranoia — by turning its complaint into a call to action.

When the actress discussed Trump’s foreign policy in what was probably the climax of her speech, she expressed her sentiments about the U.S. A melting pot of many different cultures and backgrounds, it’s replete with “outsiders and foreigners” that find their way even to Hollywood. “If you kick ’em all out, you’ll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts,” Streep said.

I compared this line with a situation that — to put things into perspective — hits closer to home. Just as America might be closing its doors to immigrants, Oak Park and many other California schools almost closed the door on out-of-district students.

Had that happened, I would have lost the majority of my friends, teammates and classmates. The student body I’ve come to love would decrease substantially; the unique people that made this school stand out from the others would be gone; and there would be gaps that those of us left behind would never be able to fill.

Similarly, America is America because of the different, the “gap-fillers” of our nation that have already planted seeds in our soil. Our very origins were from immigrants — so how can we kick them out now, ridding them of the opportunity to call this free land their home?

Such a connection allowed me to truly understand what it would be like to deport entire populations of people. Streep’s community is at stake; my school is at stake. So I could connect with her speech even at my suburban home, in my pajamas; that speaks wonders to how universal those six minutes on television became for all of us.

The ethical and political slant to Streep’s speech was vulnerable and no doubt controversial. But it was what we all needed in a time of such uncertainty — feelings which permeated all echelons of society.