"The Bulwark is home to a fairly broad spectrum of political views. We’re pretty good with nuance. And we’re great at understanding what we don’t know and where our epistemic blind spots are."
Ehhhh, kinda.
Re: the conflict in Gaza, I've repeatedly pointed out that every single Bulwark contributor with the exception of Will Saletan has been conspicuously silent about Israeli misdeeds and about the disproportionate impact of the counter-attack on Palestinian civilians (both in Gaza and the West Bank, even though Palestinians in the West Bank had nothing to do with the Hamas attack).
I've pointed this out at least 1-2 x a week for the last two months in the comments section. JVL actually replied to one of them and said that IF it could be proven that Israel was engaging in collective punishment (a war crime) by cutting off food, water, electricity, and fuel to the entire civilian population of Gaza he would call out that malfeasance.
Problem with this reply by JVL was that Israel openly and proudly announced the above (obviously not using the words "collective punishment" as that is an unambiguous war crime, but proudly advertised the substance of the conduct) as of October 8, 2023 (at least 1-2 weeks prior to JVL's response).
I've yet to see or hear (in a podcast) anything from JVL since, actually living up to his commitment to call Israel out for this specific conduct.
It's therefore kinda difficult for JVL to proudly state that Bulwark contributors are aware of their "epistemic blindspots", when JVL in particular has repeatedly ignored people pointing out this particular pro-Israeli bias (not just by me, but by many many other commentators).
It's also a little bizarre given that his respected colleague Will Saletan has repeatedly raised these same concerns about the Israeli government's conduct in this war. So I would ASSUME that JVL has read and/or listened to at least some of Saletan's content over the last two months. At this point even calling JVL's approach to Israel willful blindness would be a stretch.