I think this could fly in at least some universities. But I'm also sure it'd be tremendously controversial -- not just for its content, though I'm sure "students made to defend Nazism" would make a wonderful headline, but for its goals.

A preference for emotionally unentangled discussion of controversial issues is not itself uncontroversial, even if we're not talking about sacred values. It now seems fashionable in some circles to believe that offense carries an irreplaceable contribution to the ecosystem of ideas: the theory seems to be that certain sets of life experience lend themselves more or less inevitably to rage, and that failing to lend an ear to this rage amounts to removing those experiences from consideration (and thus contributing to selection bias within the space of acceptable discussion, though that isn't the primary objection). In practice this often seems to sneak in certain assumptions as to what is and isn't real outrage, but that shouldn't matter much in this context.