Hmmmm....
Let's see if I can offer an analogy in the field of dance. The most traditional form of dance in the west is Ballet. Classical ballet is highly underrepresented in undergrad and graduate academia, where modern, contemporary, and theory are much more prevalent.
I've taught undergrad students that disparage ballet greatly, talking about it's restrictions, how it's classist, archaic, and racist. It's the overwhelming mindset, yet ballet is still taught at the undergrad and graduate levels. It's taught as a method, but not the ONLY method. It's also taught as how it helped spawn various other disciplines and how counter culture forms and styles were spawned as a response against it.
Ballet dancers - who wish to focus more on ballet and less on post-modernist disciplines - feel like a minority in academia. And they are.
As an instructor at a university, there's a goal to broaden the horizons (so to speak), to introduce and study the various theories and praxis within the field, and to push their scholarship in dance. But if dancers were to ask me why there aren't more opportunities for ballet for undergraduate majors, my suggestion is to look into conservatories that prep for the stage career. Administration, historian, & archival work tends to be the focus for post-graduate study.
Things have changed radically even since I was in school. The shift has been now in the academic field of dance toward multimedia, commercial work, and marketing/communication, and less on history and lineage which were focal points in my grad work.
I have my own criticisms of the education industry and how much of it is a Ponzi scheme in and of itself. But in regards to the more traditionalist mindset and progressive mindsets in each field? I think it's best to accept it in academia and to find other avenues for theory and praxis for the "ballet purist" in social sciences.