I'm pointing out the inconsistencies in golang fans arguments which I've seen from the very beginning since it was touted as a "systems programming language" (which has been more or less silently changed since it wasn't true, but it doesn't stop the fans from parroting it). Same goes with many other false claims about the language, which aren't just non demonstrable, but demonstrably false.

Relax. Many people would call Docker/Kubernetes, and various types of databases like CockroachDB as systems. Lot of enterprises call large internal applications as "systems" There is no copyright on "systems programing" and it can be used only for OS kernels and such.

While I agree it's probably not worth getting angry about, I would agree with the GP that the word "systems programming" traditionally has a meaning that's different from "programming things that might be called systems". What you're describing is often more simply called "backend programming".

In that case, Python is also a "systems language", but you don't see people claiming it as such.

Then go ahead and do it. Who knows, it could dissipate a lot of your pent up anger.

You can stop with the odhominem