Author (probably) needs to learn C.
If you want something constructive, what was the point of the post if you're wrapping it up with "learning C can be useful"? I love C, it's fantastic and it has taught me a lot about how and why some things are as they are. Just compiling with a simple lib helped me understand headers and the -devel packages some distros provide. The difficulties doing so efficiently shows why newer languages have package managers. Another point could be that the entire world runs on C, and knowing it can help either porting software safely or maintaining projects.
Basically what I get from it is: "you (probably) don't need a drivers license, unless you want to drive, then get one". Sometimes the journey can be extremely beneficial even if there's no direct use. Would you claim learning C hindered you in any way?
The point of the post is that abstractions are inevitable and you choose your own level. And: you can be a great programmer without knowing C.
Absolutely, but I get the feeling you're taking the common statement "learning C can be a great experience" and bastardazing it into a straw-man "you NEED to learn C" that you then argue against.
I just think it's an obvious statement and it reads like you're being nagged by people to learn, but you don't want to learn C and defend your position. For me nothing has taught me so much about development than a weekend hacking in C and stepping through the code with Valgrind or reading the binary output did. And I recommend all my peers do the same, most don't and that's okay. But I think it's a shame that people in general don't seem to care that much outside of work.
I did enjoy the read though, even if clickbaity.
Why C as opposed to other languages? It's portable and very simple on the surface, there's not much to it but difficult enough to be a teachable opportunity.