There are some merits in 20th century continental philosophy (Foucault, Derrida, Habermas, et alia), and some of the derivative works that circulate as critical

There are some merits in 20th century continental philosophy (Foucault, Derrida, Habermas, et alia), and some of the derivative works that circulate as critical theory have merit as well. But most of what circulates in the critical theory world (or at least what circulated as of 15 years ago) is deliberately obfuscatory and has virtually no value. It seemed to be an endemic issue that by treating truth value and value judgements as fundamentally problematic, the tools for distinguishing valuable work from useless nonsense got thrown out as well. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of crap in every academic field, but at least in most fields, sensible practitioners left themselves the traditional tools for identifying the crap and forming a consensus about what was valuable.