We evaluation the plan of its own merits beyond just saying 'didn't work in the past so want work now'. The reality is a lot of knowledge was GAINED since then

We evaluation the plan of its own merits beyond just saying 'didn't work in the past so want work now'. The reality is a lot of knowledge was GAINED since then as well. This program will be very different then Apollo, not a copy. So the institutional knowledge of Appollo would not really apply and would not be a help. Going back to the moon the way Appollo did is totally impossible now, you could never pay for it and it would be to unsafe. We now actually have situation that is very different then Constellation and other programs. The program Artemis actually has buy in from Republicans and Democrats, both in congress and in the white house. The New Space movement has happened. Lead by SpaceX there have been massive amounts of improvements in the industry as whole and in launch in particular. NASA can now get access to a super-heavy class rocket whenever they want at a low price. NASA has also learned and evolve quite a bit, NASA actually does learn from its failures. The way NASA does contracting now for the most part is quite different compared to the past. NASA now prefers to use fixed size contract with contractor submitted milestones and designs. This is far more successful compared to cost-plus contracts of the past. Sadly, SLS and Orion are still on the old model. However all the Gateway System, CLIPS (cargo to the moon) and the human lander are contracted that way. Importantly, SpaceX is Starship is one of those commercial landers and if NASA finances that, going to the moon becomes not just possible, but the capabilities will be way beyond what Apollo could do. Even if NASA cancels the Artemis program again, if they finance Starship, its very likely that somebody would develop the capability and go anyway. Being pessimistic is fine, but the situation now is incredibly different then 20 years ago.