I imagine 99% of the time that metaphor is made the author would be just as happy saying "JS is the new C", it simply doesn't roll off the tongue as well.
And it's no surprise that we're getting lost in this; making arguments based on metaphors rather than the thing itself is a classic trap. We should make an effort where possible to talk about what JavaScript is rather than what it "is".
And you target JavaScript for precisely the same reason :) Perhaps the better way to say it is this: C is a language which was once written by hand, but which is increasingly being used as a target for higher-level languages. The same thing is happening to JS, but at least to me "JavaScript is the new C" is not a particularly useful way to express that similarity.
You're excluding a large chunk of compilers with those two generalizations. Targeting assembly rather than directly emitting machine code is extremely common (gcc being one of the obvious examples), and targeting C is very common for new/experimental languages.
Well, yes and no. I do agree that it often goes completely wrong and can be very misleading. But the JavaScript/assembly argument is more an analogy than it is a metaphor, and analogies are a very important function of intelligence and a tool for making important discoveries.
That said, I like your generalization "compile target" a lot more than calling JavaScript assembly.
If you're gonna make a point, make a point, it's that simple.
To be, or not to be: one could ponder:
Whether one's sense of self-worth increases
In direct proportion to one's ability to accept adversity,
Or to address challenges,
And in so doing solve said challenges?
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?
And of course entertainment is yet another game. Any sort of serious argument in a work of entertainment is probably trying to fly under the radar of skepticism anyway... Dang it. Point is, fiction is not usually a good model for rational discussion.
Not that the original metaphor is wrong or useless; but thinking of javascript as C provides some glimpse into the risks of what made C++ problematic.
The author picks Coffeescript as an example of a fairly sensible approach to the problem, but "the language-wank crazy" are taking a lot of risky approaches.