I understand the concerns of human sized space, of affordances and architectural UX; I've read my Alexander. but this seems compatible with this aesthetic style, to me. perhaps it's a conflict btwn the aesthetics of the designers and the intended occupants?

but, how would that be properly addressed? focus groups? ethnographies? surveys? consider that there are likely many distinct cultural subgroups for each of these; won't someone always be displeased? should we regress to a boring corporate mean? its certainly the choice some make

some of these I do agree with, particularly the US embassy one; a building should exude vibes appropriate to its purpose, being a cultural transmitter from the past to the future; many others, I'm not so sure. is architectural innovation impossible? or is just another culture war

there's certainly a balance to be struck between tepid tradition-worship, where the past is mimicked ad absurdum, ignoring cultural and ideological shifts, and blind future-sight, where the practical concerns of reality and context are discarded for the sake of a grand vision

but I'm not so sure that this balance has really skewed that far towards the latter, as many like the OP would claim; isn't that just another form of RETVRN? the unknown is terrifying, but we must embrace it, lest it ambush us unawares