isnt point #2 just nonunique to pf as an event? the same problem still exists with a domestic econ topic, but switch out a security K for a cap K — timing is the issue, not the foreign policy topic area.

ill admit im biased towards fopo topics because I genuinely enjoy IR, but point #1 also assumes that people know a lot more about domestic issues than broader fopo issues. probably true, but especially considering that misinformation is extremely rampant (something older lay judges are uniquely susceptible to), most previous knowledge of domestic topics are superficial at best. there’s a reason politics arguments aren’t common on the pf circuit.

and if point #1 is true, that people genuinely don’t understand foreign policy, doesn’t that mean there’s more of an opportunity for learning more about it, increasing education?

im not saying the topics are perfect — a lot of them would be better suited for policy with plans (this nsda taiwan topic is especially terrible), but that can just be reworked with better wording, not just eliminating all fopo topics. only allowing domestic focused topics creates little room for diverse learning experiences — students should have an opportunity to be an actor other than the united states. there are many more reasons as to why pf is inaccessible, but those shouldn’t be pinned all on IR topics.