How Are People Re-educated?

TL;DR: Tell me how re-education goes in communist societies.

People are detained, kept under guard 24/7 or at least for much of the day and attend classes. Introspection, journaling, confession of crimes, critical re-examination of actions and thinking are done. This takes time (months) and an inability for the subjects to just brush it off as a few hours of unpleasant challenging of their views but a determined repeated challenging in a group setting over time that encourages introspection, self-examination, self-criticism, and forced exposure to alternative views.

What are the qualities of their history classes?

I can't say for certain, most people in communist party ruled nations are not subject to re-education but to proper Marxist influenced education in the first place. Re-education is like deprogramming. I would assume historical materialism influences the curriculum.

How did they approach people “transitioning into communist ideals” coming out from capitalist ideals?

Varies by nation. China had a cultural revolution though to be fair most people did not hold necessarily capitalist or liberal ideals but a mix of feudal and somewhat capitalist inspired. It was the same in the USSR, most of the people were not transitioning from a liberal capitalist mindset but from a feudal one. Those who were already of that mindset I suggest were mostly sidelined rather than deliberately subjected to attempts to change their views and make them into communists.

China did the same thing though they did have the experience of rehabilitating/re-educating their war criminals. You can see a little of this in The Last Emperor which has a number of scenes in the re-education camp though beware that was a movie made by a western non-communist though it's content was approved by the CPC as it was filmed in China (during the opening up of the 90s admittedly so it's false to say it's 100% CPC approved so much as doesn't have a bunch of horribly egregious 100 million dead propaganda inserted which they might have objected to but may have minor problems despite being a much fairer look than most western media would give such subjects).

Could I also add some components that makes the “lesson” enjoyable to listen to so that information is digested into their mind?

You are not going to be able to "re-educate" people in a single presentation, not even if you had them captive for 12 hours each for two days could you do this. Instead you might seek at most to plant seeds, to challenge them a little. When dealing with potentially hostile audiences it can help to use techniques such as "acknowledgement AND" where you acknowledge something not too controversial for your audience, then pivot to add something a little controversial. Some people will be changed by an inflammatory presentation that strongly challenges their beliefs if those beliefs are not strongly held or supported by evidence, some people will dig in their heels or ignore it as much as possible. So there are many approaches that have some merit but the approaches with the most merit tend to aim towards planting seeds and doubts, to guiding the audience towards a conclusion but not stating it too explicitly for them and allowing them to arrive at it on their own in light of the facts given.

Thatcher ’s inner circle, which then reflected the interests of Britain’s ruling elite, had changed course economically. It marked the ditching of the post war “consensus” politics, by which both Labour and Tory parties followed broadly the same policies, and introduced harsh “monetarist” doctrines, the forerunner of neoliberalism. They advocated shrinking the public sector and dismantling heavy industry in favour of financial marketization.

This approach contradicted the entire history of British capitalism which had become a major world power through manufacturing and industrial development. When Thatcher came to power, manufacturing accounted for 40% of UK GDP. This fell dramatically for the rest of the decade and up to this day, now accounting for less than 10% of GDP.

From that Article. I will do a bit of language policing and make it more palatable to liberals. You can use these methods to avoid language which might hurt your grade without entirely giving up on being accurate.

Thatcher ’s inner circle, which then was influenced by many special interest groups, had changed course economically. It marked the ditching of the post war “consensus” politics, by which both Labour and Tory parties followed broadly the same policies, and introduced harsh “monetarist” doctrines. They advocated shrinking the public sector and dismantling heavy industry in favour of financial marketization.

This approach contradicted the entire history of British Industrialism which had become a major world power through manufacturing and industrial development. When Thatcher came to power, manufacturing accounted for 40% of UK GDP. This fell dramatically for the rest of the decade and up to this day, now accounting for less than 10% of GDP.

Just an idea for how you can present it. Id keep in mind you getting a good grade is more important than trying to change a bunch of liberals minds in that moment tho.

Is there really a place where people praise her? I live in a liberal shithole but still most people agree she was horrible.