With that attitude, I assume you don't have a degree yourself?
I think it's worth it to take a few non-related, non-exciting classes to get the piece of paper. Without that today, kids will have a hard time getting a decent job. And those that think they are too good to follow the rules will end up whining about how bad the college system is, whereas they had a choice.
If you truly want to change the system, do it from the inside. Get a PhD, teach at a university, and try to become part of the administration. But considering that all universities worldwide require some basic social studies and language courses - and have for centuries - it may be tough to change the way it is done.
Actually, I have a Bachelor's degree in Biology, a Master's in Computer Science, and additional grad work in Medical Laboratory Science.
I've also taught at the middle school and high school levels, so I'm well aware of the bureacratic minds that run public schools.
Grad school curricula tends to be focused and without the PC garbage. I don't have a problem there.
It's the undergrad, liberal arts curricula foisted on every student that irks me. At least half of the coursework I took as an undergrad was a waste of time. If you attended a decent high school, you don't need yet another survey course in Western Civ or English Comp. Get rid of the sociology crud and the pseudo-sciences that clutter core requirements.
I'm with you on language courses. However, those requirements were being phased out when I entered college 40+ years ago.
The way to change the system is to be a vocal consumer. Grad schools are much more attuned to what their students want and really need. Undergrad schools are still stuck on the medieval, we-know-what's best-for-you model (heavy on PC content).