exactly. I don't want to do a "no true scotsman" to defend React, but circumstantial evidence suggests that they wildly misused the tool

A tool that lends itself to misuse so easily is a bad tool, period.

Not necessarily. Sharp tools are often sharp because someone needs it.

I’m not a frontend dev, and have next to zero experience with anything beyond jQuery, but an analogy is shell. Bash (and zsh, though I find some of its syntactic sugar nicer, albeit still inscrutable) will happily let you do extremely stupid things, but it also lets you do extremely complicated things in a very concise manner. That doesn’t mean it’s inherently bad, it means you need to know what the hell you’re doing, and use linters, write tests, etc.

why do you say "easily"? it took them considerable effort to make that atrocity, I'm pretty sure. The fact that tens of people worked on this and yet this is the result is way more telling of the team and company culture than it is of the specific tool.

The front-end is usually just a thin layer on top of a database, sometimes with backend services (queues/processing). Having a bad language on the front-end actually helped. You don't want to write code because of the bad language, you write less code, less code is less bugs. You had to be invested to increase the lines of code. It's like the hard chair of programming languages. If you don't want programmers to dwell there, bring the hard chairs.

Have you not seen the internet these past decades?

It's meant in a tongue in cheek way. Day to day I develop in C# and Typescript/React using all the latest bells and whistles. Long for the simpler times though. The time before product managers, Scrum and ticket driven development. All the tickets drive the complexity that maybe shouldn't exist. Hard to push back against feature requests when it's a one-way street.