‘DEI Ruined The Business’: Acclaimed Clarinetist Sues Knoxville Symphony For Anti-White Discrimination
‘Hopefully I'll win my lawsuit ... and orchestras will go back to hiring the best players the way they did before DEI ruined the business.’‘Hopefully I'll win my lawsuit ... and orchestras will go back to hiring the best players the way they did before DEI ruined the business.’How the right got Dave Chappelle wrong
For years, Dave Chappelle has been treated as a kind of honorary dissident on the right. Not because he ever pledged allegiance, but because he irritated the correct people. He mocked pronouns, needled sanctimony, and refused to bow. That was enough. In a culture addicted to easy binaries, irritation became endorsement. Chappelle was recast as the anti-woke jester, the last free man in a room full of rules.
"The Unstoppable..." puts an end to that fantasy.
The right’s long flirtation with Chappelle rested on a misunderstanding. He was never an ally. He was a contrarian whose targets briefly overlapped with conservative concerns.
As the Netflix special begins, Chappelle emerges on stage wearing a jacket emblazoned with Colin Kaepernick’s name across the back, a symbol doing more work than most monologues. It is declarative. Kaepernick, a distinctly mediocre quarterback who parlayed a declining football career into a lucrative role as a full-time political brand, has long functioned more as an abstraction than as an athlete. His protest became performative, his grievance a commodity, his kneel a credential. Before a word is spoken, the audience is told where power, sympathy, and grievance will be placed. Identity is not the backdrop. Quite the opposite. It’s the billboard.
Black and white
From there, the special settles into a familiar groove. Race becomes the organizing principle, the master key, the lens through which every topic is filtered and fixed. America is again framed as a racist hellscape, a uniquely cruel experiment, a place where whiteness looms as a near-mythical menace.
This is not observation so much as obsession. The fixation risks alienating white viewers almost immediately. Some in the audience likely sense it. Others — liberal self-flagellators by instinct — laugh along anyway, even as they become the punch line of nearly every joke.
Chappelle takes aim at Elon Musk, at Trump, at the culture of DOGE-era absurdity, but the jokes rarely travel. They circle. Musk becomes less a human eccentric and more a symbol of tech-bro whiteness run amok. Trump is reduced to a prop, wheeled on whenever the set needs a familiar villain. That might be forgivable — useful, even — if the material pushed somewhere unexpected. It doesn’t. For a comedian of Chappelle’s ability, too much of the set feels curiously unambitious.
Left hook
The most telling moment comes in Chappelle’s account of Jack Johnson. Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion, endured explicit racism. That history is real. That is not in dispute. What is striking is how Chappelle treats that history. Johnson becomes less a man of his time and more a stand-in for black people in the present, besieged by the same “demonic white man.”
And so Chappelle conflates Johnson's struggles with with the lives of rappers T.I. and the late Nipsey Hussle — and celebrates all three heroes for opposing white America.
As BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock recently posted on X:
This comedy special exposes [Chappelle] as highly controlled opposition, the ultimate plant, a fraud. He pretends to be a fearless speaker of truth to power. It's laughable. No one with a brain can witness the Charlie Kirk assassination and then argue/suggest that Nipsey Hussle, T.I., and Jack Johnson were/are the real rebels, the real threats to American hegemony. Dave quoted Jack Johnson as saying his life was dedicated to the pursuit of pleasure. He was a boxer with the worldview of a modern gangsta rapper.
Some kings?
And then comes Chappelle’s praise of Saudi Arabia.
Not cautiously. Not ironically. He recounts performing at a comedy festival in Riyadh, openly boasting about the size of the paycheck. He describes feeling freer speaking there than in the United States. Freer. In a society where speech is monitored, dissent is criminalized, and punishment still includes public canings and amputations.
The audience laughs on schedule, applauding with the enthusiasm of trained sea lions. I found myself wondering why.
There is something almost surreal about hearing a man who has spent years describing America as uniquely oppressive extol the virtues of a monarchy where speech is tolerated only when it is toothless. The contradiction is never addressed. It simply floats past, buoyed by bravado and bank balance.
This isn’t hypocrisy in the cheap sense. It is something more revealing — and easier to miss because Chappelle is such a gifted orator. His moral compass isn’t anchored to freedom, but to grievance. America is condemned because it fails to live up to an ideal. Saudi Arabia is praised because it pays well and demands little beyond discretion.
It would be easier if "The Unstoppable..." were simply bad. It is not. Chappelle remains a master of timing. His cadence still carries. The problem is less talent than trajectory.
RELATED: Dave Chappelle faces fierce backlash over criticism of US while performing in Saudi Arabia
Punching inward
What once felt dangerous now feels dutiful. What once cut across power now reinforces a different orthodoxy. Chappelle no longer punches up or down so much as inward, tightening his world until everything is interpreted through race alone.
The right’s long flirtation with Chappelle rested on a misunderstanding. He was never an ally. He was a contrarian whose targets briefly overlapped with conservative concerns. When he mocked trans men in women’s sports, it landed during a moment of peak absurdity, when the subject was everywhere and ripe for satire. It was easy. It was funny. But it was never a statement of allegiance.
"The Unstoppable..." makes that clear. The jacket, the Johnson parable, the Saudi sermon, the relentless racial framing — all of it points in the same direction.
Comedy, at its best, unsettles everyone. It exposes what our certainties conceal. In this special, Chappelle appears more interested in confirming his own.
Unstoppable, perhaps. But no longer subversive.
Here’s Why Democrats Are Subjugating Themselves To Somalis In Humiliation Rituals
The left immediately sees Somalis as oppressed by the white, straight, Christian patriarchy that it claims controls everything.Why Hasn’t Trump’s CDC Ditched This Rule That Punishes Neighborhoods For Being Too White?
Race discrimination is illegal and unconstitutional regardless of 'equitable' motives.Former NFL player melts down after old ‘Caucasian’ mistakes him for an Uber Eats driver
Former NFL standout Keyshawn Johnson took to social media this week after a run-in with a “Caucasian” woman whom he guessed to be no older than 65 — because he was upset that she asked him if he was an Uber Eats driver.
“So, I just went to pick up food from a restaurant down the street from my crib. And I live in an affluent neighborhood. You know, it’s many different ethnicities and all of those sort of things, and people make money and, you know, they live a certain lifestyle,” Johnson said into the camera.
“So, when I walk in the restaurant to pick up my food, I had somebody who’s a Caucasian — I’m African-American, whatnot — ask me if I was, like, a Uber Eats or DoorDash or something, you know, picking up the food for delivery or whatever. She says, ‘Oh, are you here with Uber Eats?’” he explained.
“I was like, ‘No, I’m not,’ and then I proceed to move forward and say, ‘Everybody that’s a minority isn’t Uber Eats or picking up food to go and delivering service or nothing like that,’” he said.
Johnson went on to claim that the woman tried to backtrack and say she “didn’t mean it that way,” and that “she couldn’t have been no more than, like, 65.”
“I mean, I understand they get plastic surgery and all that, but she couldn’t have been no more than, like, 65 years old. But the fact that she would ask me something like that, it rubbed me the wrong way. And I just want to know what y’all think,” he said, asking, “Am I overreacting?”
“If I’m sensitive, y’all let me know,” he added.
“Keyshawn, you’re sensitive,” BlazeTV host Jason Whitlock answers.
“I hope there’s someone in his circle that could tell him that someone asking you, ‘Hey, do you have a job?’ or you’re working a job or whatever, or mistaking you for someone who’s working, that’s not an insult,” he continues.
“Keyshawn, you’re being overly sensitive,” he adds.
Want more from Jason Whitlock?
To enjoy more fearless conversations at the crossroads of culture, faith, sports, and comedy with Jason Whitlock, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
The liberal myth of the 'first black Briton' just got blown out of the water
Liberals in the United Kingdom have worked desperately to paint white Britons uniquely as history's villains, erase them from British history, and/or programmatically undermine their unique claims to indigeneity in the isles.
The trouble for the institutional proponents of this vilification and revisionism campaign is that facts keep getting in the way.
Case in point: Recent DNA analysis confirms that the second-century skeleton gleefully identified by the BBC as the "first black Briton" was not a sub-Saharan African but rather a white woman.
'Her story has shifted over time and has sparked important debates about diversity.'
A skeleton was discovered in the 1950s in Beachy Head, England, which belonged to a young woman who lived in the second or third century. Her remains sat in storage for decades until 2012, when Jonathan Seaman, the heritage officer at the Eastbourne Borough council, and his team "came across two boxes, which said ‘Beachy Head, something to do with 1956 or 1959,’ and that was about it."
As there were virtually no records available about the remains, Seaman and his team worked to identify the Roman-era skeleton, sending it off for facial reconstruction, which was undertaken by Caroline Wilkinson, an academic then at Dundee University.
Seaman recalled, "Straight away on seeing this girl, [Wilkinson] said, 'Oh my, you realize you’ve got a sub-Saharan African here?’"
Seaman noted further:
Caroline subsequently had it looked at by two more experts who agreed, without being prompted, that this individual showed many traits of being a sub-Saharan African person. They were 100% sure that this was the origin of this lady. There are certain features of the skull that you can tell are Caucasian or African. We didn’t know her carbon date at that stage or anything about her, so again it just deepened the mystery. They reconstructed her, and as they did so, her African origins came out in the features of her face.
While the media made a big deal out of this supposed discovery, the BBC went further than most, hyping it both in its news coverage and in its 2016 "Black and British: A Forgotten History" documentary.
In the documentary, British-Nigerian host David Olusoga — overcome with delight at the sight of a facial reconstruction of the Beachy Head Woman with dark skin, dark eyes, and dark hair — tells Seaman, "So she's a black Briton? ... So she's the same as me — she's somebody who is both [British and African] but who spent their life in this country."
RELATED: No more stiff upper lip: My fellow Brits are fed up with 'diversity'
As part of the documentary series, the BBC installed a plaque where the remains of the Beachy Head Woman were found, stating, "The remains of the 'BEACHY HEAD WOMAN' were found near this site. Of African origin, she lived in East Sussex 2nd-3rd century AD."
The plaque was removed in 2023 after DNA testing by the Crick Institute determined that the Beachy Head Woman's origin was not Africa but possibly Cyprus.
More recently, a research team led by Drs. Selina Brace and William Marsh of London's Natural History Museum and Andy Walton of University College London re-examined the skeleton using state-of-the-art DNA analysis techniques. They determined that the Beachy Head Woman was neither an African nor a Cypriot but a white local from the south coast of England.
According to the researchers' findings, which were published in the Journal of Archaeological Science, "she shows a close affinity to individuals from modern-day England and contemporary Roman-era Iron Age individuals in England and Northern continental Europe."
DNA results indicate that the Beachy Head Woman had blond hair, blue eyes, and "intermediate skin," with paleness weighted as more likely.
The researchers noted that "the decade-long investigation into Beachy Head Woman's origins has centered around how her story has shifted over time and has sparked important debates about diversity and how we portray individuals from our past. The results presented here will no doubt add to this."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
'Enough white guys already': The war on white men because of DEI in the working world exposed in damning report
Jacob Savage, a Los Angeles-based writer, looked at the phenomenon of the "vanishing white male writer" earlier this year in an eye-opening piece for Compact magazine.
He noted, for instance, that whereas the New York Times' "Notable Fiction" list included seven white American men under the age of 43 in 2012, not a single white male Millennial made the list in either 2021 or 2022. In each of the subsequent two years, only one individual from that particular demographic made the list.
'The phenomenon of white male dispossession strikes at the core of what’s been going on over the last decade.'
Savage stressed that the Times' list was hardly exceptional in its exclusion of white Millennial men. Last year, nobody from that particular demographic was apparently featured in the year-end fiction lists for Vanity Fair, the Atlantic, and Vulture. Of the 53 Millennial fiction writers featured in Esquire magazine's year-end book lists since 2020, only one was a white American man.
Savage — who concluded in March that "white male Millennials are still unable to speak directly to their own condition" and that "in some ways that inability is their condition" — is back with another damning piece about the "lost generation" and the fallout of the DEI war on meritocracy.
In response to the viral article, which was published on Monday, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Chairwoman Andrea Lucas stated, "This is a story chock full of unlawful discrimination. There’s no DEI exception to the bar on race and sex discrimination. We need courageous employees/applicants to speak up to help attack and remedy this misconduct."
Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon echoed Lucas' post and wrote, "Step up!"
RELATED: University of Minnesota faces backlash over project that seeks to cure the 'Whiteness Pandemic'
At the outset of the article, Savage provided several indications that the world of literary fiction was not the only place where the institutionalization of DEI proved to be bad news for white men.
He noted, for instance, that white men represented 48% of lower-level TV writers in 2011 but only 11.9% last year. At Harvard, members of the same cohort held 39% of tenure-track positions in the humanities in 2014 but only 18% in 2023.
"In industry after industry, gatekeepers promised extra consideration to anyone who wasn't a white man — and then provided just that," wrote Savage.
While some older white men, specifically those in the Boomer and Gen X camps, may have mistakenly concluded that DEI is a relatively benign practice — especially since the "mandates to diversify" apparently tended to impact their younger fellows — Savage suggested that for white male Millennials, "DEI wasn't a gentle rebalancing — it was a profound shift in how power and prestige were distributed."
A man identified only as Andrew who experienced this shift firsthand in a new media environment told Savage, "With all the declarations these newsrooms had been making, the imperatives — 'enough white guys already' — seemed to me to be the mantra."
An unnamed senior hiring editor at a major media outlet told Savage that "the hope was always that you were going to hire a diverse candidate," adding that a competent black woman "would get accelerated to the New York Times or the Washington Post in short order."
While most major media outfits such as the Times and the Post had by 2019 gone out of their way to make sure their offices were majority female, Savage noted that "in the aftermath of George Floyd's death, newsrooms tripped over themselves to stage a 'reckoning.'"
'It was jarring how we would talk about excluding white guys.'
Savage highlighted an apparent aversion beginning in 2020 at various companies to hiring men and whites from an American population that U.S. Census Bureau data indicated was 49.1% male and 57% non-Hispanic white.
For example, women reportedly made up 75% of the new hires in 2022 at Condé Nast — a mass media company that set a goal in 2020 to have 50% of the candidates on its hiring slates to hail from a "wide range of backgrounds and schools" — and only 49% of new hires identified as white. The following year, men and whites made up 34% and 50% of new hires at the company, respectively.
The Atlantic, another operating theater in the campaign against meritocracy, boasted in its 2024 DEI report that roughly 46% of the individuals the magazine hired between July 2023 and June 2024 were non-white and that 71% were women.
Savage indicated further that at the Los Angeles Times, only 7.7% of interns have been white men since 2020; that between 2018 and 2024, "just two or three" of the roughly 30 summer interns each year at the Washington Post have been white men; and that only 10% of the nearly 220 fellows who have participated in the New York Times' yearlong fellowship since the program replaced the paper's summer internship in 2018 were white men.
Various other publications including Indy Week have no white men left on their editorial staff to displace or replace.
"For a typical job we'd get a couple hundred applications, probably at least 80 from white guys," one hiring editor told Savage in reference to this so-called racial "reckoning" championed by academics, activists, and others bad actors. "It was a given that we weren’t gonna hire the best person. ... It was jarring how we would talk about excluding white guys."
According to a November 2022 ResumeBuilder.com survey, one in six hiring managers across the United States indicated they were told to deprioritize hiring white men; 48% said they were asked to prioritize "diversity over qualifications"; and 53% said they believed their jobs were in danger if they didn't hire enough "diverse employees."
Andrew — who was apparently teased for months with the promise of a senior reporter position at a well-known publication only to later learn the job went to a non-white homosexual 10 years younger — said, "If you're a white man, you gotta be the superstar."
Savage underscored that this anti-white misandry is alive and well in the entertainment, medical, and tech industries but also in the academy, where the severity of the problem is partly hidden by the continued employment of elderly white male faculty members behind whom the doors to entry were closed.
"White men may still be 55% of Harvard’s Arts & Sciences faculty (down from 63% a decade ago), but this is a legacy of Boomer and Gen X employment patterns," wrote Savage. "For tenure-track positions — the pipeline for future faculty — white men have gone from 49% in 2014 to 27% in 2024 (in the humanities, they’ve gone from 39% to 21%)."
The situation is similarly bleak for the cohort at other institutions, including Brown University, which has hired only three white American men as tenure-track professors in the humanities and social sciences since 2022.
"For a decade, it kept going, faster and faster. Without any actual quotas to achieve — only the constant exhortation to 'do better' — the diversity complex became self-radicalizing, a strange confluence of top-down and bottom-up pressure," wrote Savage. "No one ever said what the right number of white men would be, but it was always fewer than you currently had."
BlazeTV host Lomez said of the incredible response online to Savage's article, "6 million views on a political article is insane. The phenomenon of white male dispossession strikes at the core of what’s been going on over the last decade. Any politician, anyone with any ambition to influence, must take on this fight. The time is now."
Gene Hamilton, the president of America First Legal who previously served as Trump White House deputy counsel, noted, "If you are a person who believes in merit and wants to restore merit to hiring/firing/admissions/etc, you must understand that it is not enough to sit quietly and hope things get better. If you know someone who has been harmed, encourage that person to take legal action now."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Schools made boys the villain. The internet gave them a hero.
After Nick Fuentes catapulted into the spotlight following his appearance on “The Tucker Carlson Show,” Americans faced an unwelcome reckoning: Who is this person, what are “Groypers,” and is he really so revered by young boys and men?
The media frenzy produced predictable reactions. Republicans insisted he doesn’t represent them. Democrats blamed Donald Trump and “fascism.” Reporters rushed to diagnose “extremism” in young men. Everyone condemned the boys who followed him. Almost no one asked what made those boys susceptible to Fuentes’ content in the first place.
In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.
We labeled these boys racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic without ever considering how we got here. It is easier to scold than to understand. But when it comes to Gen Z and social media-saturated boys, we default to quick, reductive narratives that ignore the larger picture.
Here is the real crux of the issue: If you ignore boys’ needs in school, the red-pill internet is more than happy to fill that void.
One father of an 11-year-old boy went viral after describing what he saw at his son’s elementary school band orientation night. “I despise the Groyper movement,” he wrote, “… [but] as the night went on it became obvious to me why young men rage against the larger social system.”
He described classrooms covered in DEI messaging, trans Pride flags, and “basically ever[y] sort of race and gender social justice messaging you can imagine.” He also noted the political commentary from teachers and the strict behavioral expectations placed on boys throughout the school day.
He shared two points that reflect what millions of boys experience today: “The boys are treated almost as though they are defective girls,” he wrote. His son even came home excited because he had seen a male teacher at school.
That is the reality for boys across the country. Thousands of families report a growing feminization of schools that leaves boys bored and disengaged. As author Richard Reeves put it on “On Point,” many parents feel their sons are square pegs being forced into round holes.
Boys just aren’t engaged. I wonder why?
But it isn’t just boys. The ongoing assault on male teachers — and their resulting exodus from the school system — leaves boys without anyone to look up to.
Scott Yenor captured what is happening in a recent article for the Federalist. “Today’s schools emphasize belonging and nurturing at the expense of objective standards,” he wrote. Turning in work on time is no longer imperative; loose grading is expected; schools are now run by inclusivity and "gentle parenting."
Yenor ends with a pointed observation: “Men should be given enough credit to know where they are not wanted.”
With schools shifting ideologically and male teachers disappearing, boys lose crucial role models. Research shows male teachers — especially in elementary and middle school — boost test scores, engagement, and behavior. Young boys, particularly those from unstable backgrounds, rely on male teachers for support they cannot get elsewhere.
The effects on boys who are “treated like malfunctioning girls” go far beyond academics. Boys are falling behind both emotionally and developmentally. They read at lower levels, enter kindergarten less prepared, and take on fewer leadership roles.
In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.
RELATED: America’s new lost generation is looking for home — and finding the wrong ones
So the internet, in all its damaged glory, fills the void. As Rolling Stone’s Eli Thompson observed, Fuentes’ content once popped up on Instagram occasionally, but now his voice is everywhere for teenage boys.
“But even when he makes comments they see as fringe, it boosts his popularity because he’s edgy and willing to say whatever comes to his mind,” Thompson noted. “That has become his perfect recipe to get young male fans.”
Thompson identifies a hard truth: It is not the extremist content that hooks them. Boys don’t necessarily identify with what is being said. They identify with being identified.
Does Nick Fuentes promote views we wouldn’t want spreading in a democratic society? Certainly. Is he anti-Semitic, racist, and everything we don’t want boys absorbing? Yes. Boys do need better media literacy so that they aren’t enthralled by money-driven influencers like him.
But none of that changes the basic reality: In times of isolation, boys look for connection.
What can schools do to keep boys from turning to Nick Fuentes? Stop ignoring them. Bring back male teachers. Use instructional methods that recognize the strengths of both boys and girls. Pair boys with strong adult male mentors who teach them to channel their strengths, not suppress them. And when inviting guest speakers, bring in men who model discipline, purpose, and genuine success.
Boys aren’t broken. They’re ignored. Fix that, and the red-pill internet — and Nick Fuentes — lose their grip.
Justice Department Sues Minneapolis Schools For Giving Preferential Treatment To Non-White Teachers
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) over a collective bargaining agreement giving preferential treatment to non-white teachers and shelling out other benefits based on race. After settling a three-week strike of the Minnesota Federation of Teachers in 2022, MPS included a provision in new teacher contracts that let […]VIRAL VIDEO: Cinnabon worker yells racist slurs at customers, and the internet crowns her a hero
A video has gone mega-viral after a Wisconsin Cinnabon worker, Crystal Wilsey, was recorded shouting racist slurs, including the N-word, at a Somalian husband and wife.
The video showed Wilsey cursing at the customers, at one point even saying, “I am racist and I’ll say it to the whole entire world. Don’t be disrespectful.” However, in an unedited version of the video, the husband can first be heard asking Wilsey if "sexualizing your body makes you a better person."
When Wilsey asks if she is being recorded, the wife responds, "I'm going to record you, yes."
There are then cuts in the video, before it escalates to the woman calling the couple the N-word. While many viewers were angry that she used the slur, the response online has been divided.
But BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere knows where he stands.
“Not the best moment anyone’s ever had in a Cinnabon,” Burguiere tells CBN’s Dan Andros on “Stu Does America.”
Despite the Somalian couple being accused of starting the altercation, Burguiere believes there's "never an excuse to lose control of yourself."
"What I’m kind of interested in here, more than anything else, is the reaction of some online who are basically saying it’s wrong that she was fired from this job, which obviously she was immediately,” he says.
“It’s ‘wrong’ because that’s basically cancel culture in action. Is this cancel culture, Dan?” he asks.
“There’s cancel culture and then there’s play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And what happened here is the latter. Like, let’s just think about your job here. You are making delicious cinnamon rolls that smell yummy … and it’s like, this is your job,” Andros says.
“Your job is to give someone a little taste of Cinnabon happiness. You know, cinnamon roll goodness and deliciousness and with a smile on your face. … Isn’t it that the customer’s always right? They might be jerks, they might be saying rude things, they might be in a hurry, they might complain,” he continues.
“Just smile. You’re getting paid,” he adds.
However, not everyone feels the same way as Burguiere and Andros, as Crystal has raised over $100,000 on GiveSendGo after her firing.
“She’s a representative of a company, in the same way that if I went into, you know, a Sbarro, and they were like, ‘By the way, can’t stand those Jews,’ I would say that person should lose their job,” Burguiere explains.
“Not because I love cancel culture,” he continues, adding, “because they’re representing your business."
"They have an absolute right to fire you,” Andros chimes in.
Want more from Stu?
To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com