Meryl Streep Attacks Imaginary Brownshirts—Ignoring the Real Leftist Brownshirts [WATCH]

She refers to Trump voters as brownshirts when it is “Progressives” who are attacking persons and property.

Meryl Streep claims that she is courageously standing against brownshirts. The New York Times reports,

Ms. Streep, in New York City accepting an award from the Human Rights Campaign, referred to the backlash she received after the Golden Globes in January, when she gave a speech denouncing Mr. Trump.

“It’s terrifying to put the target on your forehead, and it sets you up for all sorts of attacks and armies of brownshirts and bots and worse, and the only way you can do it is to feel you have to,” Ms. Streep said. “You have to. You don’t have an option. You have to.”

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Science is Settled

It was not immediately clear to whom Ms. Streep was referring in using the loaded term “brownshirts,” which was originally applied to a paramilitary group that assisted the rise of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany.

So, the New York Times gave us some historical context. Of course, “paramilitary” is rather a high term for the street-thuggery and vandalism that the brownshirts sometimes engaged in. That raises a question: Why didn’t the Times give readers background about what has been going on that relates to the brownshirts? They only refer to Meryl Streep’s earlier speech and Donald Trump’s use of Twitter.

What they don’t include is relevant events that have involved people who have actually displayed the behavior like that of the brownshirts.

Here’s a “fake news” Russian propaganda video that gives you more relevant information than you will ever get from the New York Times:

I guess, technically, these people aren’t typically garbed in literal brown shirts. They seem to prefer black garb and masks.

Both the Berkeley riot and the New York violence, reported by RT, occurred after Streep’s Golden Globes hysteria but before her speech about brownshirts. While real street violence has been perpetrated by the anti-Trump Left, Streep pretends that she has reason to fear violence from the Right. This is not only a falsehood invented to make her appear brave, but a justification for more violence from the Left. She (and the New York Times) is signaling that masked violence is really self-defense against aggression.

This is not a surprise; Hollywood obviously promotes Leftist brownshirt violence.

Remember, the violence at Berkeley was intentionally organized. The design was to blackmail owners of venues where people can speak to get them to shut down non-progressives and deny them an opportunity to communicate ideas that the Left doesn’t like.

But Meryl Streep claims that Trump voters are the new brownshirts. She is covering for violence.

This is the kind of mindset that allows people to bully and intimidate conservatives into hiding. It covers up the fact that Republicans in some regions of the country are forced to keep their meetings secret.

The mantra is always that the conservatives are fascists. Meryl Streep and other progressives will keep using that mantra to pretend that they are struggling to defend themselves from aggression.

Joe Scudder

Joe Scudder is the "nom de plume" (or "nom de guerre") of a fifty-ish-year-old writer and stroke survivor. He lives in St Louis with his wife and still-at-home children. He has been a freelance writer and occasional political activist since the early nineties. He describes his politics as Tolkienesque.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.