You can disagree and think that the OP was letting the definition of "minimalism" and "brutalism" do too much heavy lifting.

But you rather imply that without javascript you cannot create a "winning" website. And ignored that the OP has a real point: Can we call a website minimalist if it requires javascript. It was not excluded that you could embellish (maybe a lot) with javascript. In the same way I would expect javascript to load async.

While I have heard your argument before it implies a really interesting design "smell". On that we might disagree. But it is there nevertheless.

Your curiosity implies that winner takes all. I agree that javascript has won. But I feel you imply that it is then ok for the victor to burn down the village. We forgot what made the web. The foundation is still html and not javascript. What I read as the "javascript attitude" makes is harder to transition away from javascript when that day comes.

Javascript is really great. Warts and all. But the "strong" proponents keeps forgetting the beauty in separation of concerns. On this point we can then have an honest disagreement.

I hope I do not come off too harsh. I genuinely wanted to address your curiosity.

I think the OPs pov is quite clear. So with your reaction I suspect we also disagree on JS0 and JSugar. That is again some bad voodoo on how to seperate concerns from people who looks at who is winning now and missing the bigger picture.