To a first approximation: Yes. What particularly bugged me was giving prominent cover placement to ideologues like Jean Kirkpatrick, who never met a tin-horned tyrant she didn't like. It was (AFAICT) part of a heavy lean by FA into an intellectually deficient ruling clique.

I don't know if that was bc reaganites just took over a lot of the FP establishment for a while... at least recently, I've noticed their list of invited writers seem to reflect "bothsidisms" no matter how wacky.

You especially see this in the occasional response articles where several invited authors offer rapid-fire responses to a featured article. When there are a limited number of reasonable positions to take, wackiness is bound to seep in.

Not that this is particularly wacky, but here’s an example: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2021-0...

Are you suggesting that all world views, no matter how ignorant or contradictory, are equally valid?

I read it more like "did you unsubscribe to the magazine because the quality decreased, or because it took an editorial position you disagreed with?"

We always talk about the importance of understanding opposing viewpoints.

There's value in paying someone to say things you already think, but in a better way than you could. But, there's also value in reading the best version of an argument you despise, and reckoning with it.

Do you believe that the views you perceive as ignorant and contradictory, are objectively ignorant and contradictory? Could there be any bias in your perception?

Do you believe that no views are ignorant and contradictory? Or do you simply believe that we aren't equipped to tell them from ones that aren't?

If it's the former, I will have to say I disagree (If I could put words to it, in a manner that you would find ignorant and contradictory, and bad-faith and self-serving.) If it's the latter, then there's no point in discussing, well, anything.

The FPRI (Foreign Policy Research Institute) has insightful interviews with people close to the cauldron of events. At year 75 since colonial independence there is very fine interview with a historian of Pakistan which can be contrasted with what deskjob handlers have to say.