- c: speed of light in meters per second
- m: mass in kilograms
- energy: joules
- c: speed of light in meters per second
- m: mass in kilograms
- energy: joules
So there’s nothing special about the metric system. When we want to discuss this kind of relationship without reference to human convention we talk about a quantity’s dimension (not geometric like 3D). A Meter and a foot both have dimensions of length. c has units of length/time. 1 kilogram and 1 gram both have units of mass. And so on.
For the original poster, you could equally use c in miles per hour, mass in "pounds", and get whatever that produces for energy (I'm sure there's a name for it).
This is also why Imperial units produce such amusing things as Foot-Pounds (for torque). The math all works out in the end, but you get some amusing numbers along the way.
That the direct conversion from mass to energy follows the same shape isn't really surprising, it sort of has to.
That said, the joule was only explicitly defined as kgm/s^2 in 1946 (or 1935), after Einstein and nuclear physics.
It's really not in any way surprising - this is basically the definition of the Joule. The link between units of kinetic energy and units of thermal energy is actually more surprising.
The surprising thing about E=mc² is that it gives a definition of energy for a completely stationary body outside any external field.
One way to look at it is actually that this is simply the kinetic energy of the body, and that all "stationary" bodies are in fact moving with speed c on the t coordinate in 4D space-time ("a body which is not moving in space at all is moving with speed c towards the future"). [Note that of course speeds are all relative to some reference frame.]