> but there is a strong tendency in this corner of systems developer to assume that stupid mistakes are a fault of the programmer and not the language, and so such benefits are considered flaws because it means letting in stupid people.

I don't disagree with you, but I think I can steelman Torvalds' position a little bit:

Low-level development is touchy. If you're not extremely careful, you're going to make errors which no language could possibly prevent, which could very well hard-brick some poor schlub's gear. Selecting for people who know the most "be careful" of all the "be careful" languages means selecting for people who are at least somewhat less likely to make errors like those.