Is this something you experienced, or simply something you read on the internet and believe it true? Because I haven’t seen it.
To qualify the very limited scope of my personal observations, I’m days away from finishing my second undergraduate degree. In the last twenty years I’ve taken over fifty individual classes in law, psychology, sociology, criminology, political science, history, and economics. Probably a couple other dribs and drabs in there I’m forgetting. I’ve had a number of specific courses on subjects including the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law, national security and political dissent, and causes of war.
Many of my courses have looked at all of these subjects through a critical lens, involving questioning power structures, historical narratives, conventional understandings of how certain political, legal, and social orders came to be; but not once have I done a course and felt that it was ‘re-education’, or ‘conspiracies’ as you describe. There have been profs I’ve disagreed with - sometimes strongly - and it won’t surprise you that I can be vocal about it. My grades certainly didn’t suffer for it. Nor did I see contentious discussions stifled so long as students acted respectfully and in good faith.
Maybe what you’re describing happens elsewhere; I can’t speak to that. But I do think I can say that my school is pretty typical of what you’d find across Canada on our university campuses, and I’ve definitely been eyeballs deep in exactly the sorts of programs and courses where, were this going on, it would be found.
Food for thought.
Yes, I have experienced and seen it. In many ways.
My experience is that most young people today are severely socially-disabled. Social media and COVID devastated their development as social animals. They're constantly fixated on their phones and wearing earpods, insulating themselves from real life as much as possible. In class, they barely respond to professors, who often find themselves annoyed by silence moreso than by chaos.
The length of their development is dominated by algorithms that are provably demonstrated to be politically-oriented. Facebook's biases are well known, Twitter before Elon's takeover collaborated with the government to silence dissident voices, TikTok which is owned by China and programmed to teach kids the most civilizationally destructive thought patterns, dating apps and Instagram which absolutely wreck their perception of self and of the opposite-gender, etc.
They are less and less mature at older and older ages, as they are excessively coddled and protected from normal hardships and disagreement. They are all pushed into colleges, which means performance is over-emphasized, so they focus on memorizing the material so they can blurt it out, instead of analyzing it, questioning it, and truly understanding it. They perceive disagreement as personal attacks.
Dissidents are generally bullied into silence, lest they be ostracized.
Thus, while for you critical theories may not be problematic as an analytical tool, for easily-influenced youngsters they become the corner stones of destructive ideologies. Teaching gullible 21 year-olds that "Western civilization is nothing but a tyrannical, racist and xenophobic patriarchy" before they've had the chance to learn that their pampered lives have been made possible only by the providential existence of said civilization is a recipe for disaster.
Now, we also have to take into account our own biases. I know I am quite the dissident, and you are philosophically the bureaucrat's bureaucrat - no offence intended -, so two ends of a spectrum. Between your account that there is absolutely nothing to complain about and my doom & gloom experience, there is probably a middle ground, but I'd wager it's closer to what I describe, given one cannot ignore the well-documented influence of recent technological developments, as well as the long-run effects of Cultural-Marxist entryism on academia since the '60s.
I would caveat that the indoctrination, by most professors, is mostly accidental. It cannot be denied at the systemic level, though, when you look at the fact that faculties have gone from 60% liberal on average to more than 90%. Some faculties are more susceptible to these phenomena than others of course, STEM remaining vastly superior in quality to humanities (especially sociology, linguistics, psychology).
.
