I think it's a sensible stance to take on neutral subjects, like language or mathematics. There has been an active movement among teachers unions to infect such subjects with left wing politics and it's blatant propagandising which does nothing to help teach the actual material. It's also a source for concern in public schools, where a small group of people have control over large amounts of public funds coming from diverse political groups and can potentially abuse them to push a particular message. Even if public schools only ever teach neutral subjects in a neutral manner though, someone still has to teach values. Sunday school performed this function for a while, but I'm not sure if it still does. I think the best model of educational institutions I've come across so far is the spartan one: When a boy entered puberty he was sent off to a private boot camp/military academy where he'd be taught everything he needed to know. When he became a man he'd have to gain membership of one of several private militias (likely linked to the academy he attended). If he failed to be accepted into a militia by a certain age, the state would not grant him citizenship. That kind of system has a good mix of competition, oversight and meritocracy. Parents have a chance to instill their values, their wider community has a chance to instill theirs, and the nation has a final say in which subcultures are considered to be full members.