The worst bridge that can stand up to the load is good, cost efficient engineering. The worst code is not. One, because bad code hides bugs that you probably don’t have rigorous enough testing to find. Two, because there will be new demands on that code in the future, and bad code is harder and riskier to change. You might look like a responsible adult when you ship it today, but three years later the new maintainers will know you were a child making a mess. And probably end up doing a rewrite, or at least needing to.
All this “woo” with languages and frameworks and services and whatever else, is the search for higher quality code.
There is a certain myopia about new things vs. getting better at design with old things. There is a certain blindness to iterative improvement, e.g. Rust is much sexier than modern C++ as a solution to the problems of C++98. But rather than condescending to this you can channel the energy into more responsible directions.
I work in a team where many people have zero aesthetic sensibility about code. Not like “I know this is ugly but we have to get it done today” or “I know this is ugly but it’s the best we could come up with,” just zero sense that it’s ugly. Grass is not greener.