This is a fair point. Most of my response is driven by the fact that I think there is value in understanding a lot of the behind-the-scenes things that the language does, so I mostly agree. Really, I’d suggest learning as many languages as possible - they influence the way you think about the code you are writing and having the different perspectives allows you to broaden your horizons and see what else is possible. Eventually, this is how you form your opinions on what makes a programming language “good” and allows you to contribute to the decisions we all make daily over what technology to use and what becomes popular.

I still do think there is value in learning C, though. Of extant languages (disregarding assembly), I believe C is the ancestor of nearly every programming language today. From a historical perspective, understanding C and it’s shortcomings allow you to understand the motivations that created even higher level languages. Similarly, it would be hard to understand a lot of the decisions the C language makes without an understanding of assembly, why assembly instructions are as they are without understanding computer architecture, etc.

There is also an argument to be made that C is still extremely ubiquitous. I like Rust as a language very much and think there is a great deal to learn from it, but it is still so immature (though it has come a long way) that I would feel disingenuous suggesting it to someone who only knows python as a way to gain a better understanding of programming languages. I imagine it would be akin to encouraging a Buddhist to practice Lutheranism shortly after Luther’s schism rather than learn about Catholicism first - someone who does so would be blindly ignoring all the history and motives that drove that change in the first place.