I think this is moreso a function of the incoming students rather than how the universities actually teach. My school has a famous reputation for political apathy, but we're still predominantly liberal.
[tired_rant]I wouldn't necessarily agree. Although I am no
authority on the topic, it seems more reasonable that school administrators would more or less capitulate to an increasingly enraged generation. I honestly have had history professors asking "well what do you think happened" following an open-ended lesson. History isn't about speculation, even for historians who need a bit of speculation to create a logical result. The paramount ingredient is factual evidence, and this sets a poor precedent. The same thing occurred in a political science class, where most of the time, it was this guy spreading hyper-leftist propaganda. Factual evidence was involved, but it was mostly speculation leading to emotional approaches to something that should have covered a more matter-of-fact history of "what we know" and "what we don't know". No lines were drawn, and a lot of the lecture hall ate it up. It would be reasonable to expect good professor evaluations for professors which agreed with their students. But opinions have taken a larger role in academia than they should have. Part of the reasons on why I'm taking an academic leave. I'm upset that the academic world really took strides away from critical brown townysis and logical methods.[/tired_rant]
They're not educated, they're indoctrinated. No person educated in subject of history or economics would willingly label themselves a communist and fly the hammer and sickle. No person with any logical thinking skills would label themselves an anarchist, fly an anarchist flag (wtf?), then take to the streets to break stuff.
Seems more fitting for a Venn Diagram. Knowledge (education) can always be used for vile purposes given poor morals (indoctrination). Given a capacity to manipulate, that can make some people very, very dangerous.
