Nah. This is cherry picking the examples to fit the narrative you are pushing and building a strawman argument on top of it.

The old buildings that were built/designed poorly didn't survive.

There are many great modern buildings that are build to last and respect the surroundings. Maybe in the US there are many cardboxes masquerading as buildings but in europe (for example, because that's what I know) a lot of "the new stuff" will be here for centuries to come unless some disaster strikes it down.

It is valid to say you much prefer the old (style).

It is valid to criticize the modern stuff, and there is a lot to criticize, just when you generalize too much, it is just a strawman. Be better.

I like both. I like clever and simple designs that work for the purpose they were designed for. I like modern buildings (or renovations) built in organic medieval european urbanism context. I'd rather live in a *great* modern building, than in an old one (again, speaking about european context and climate).

I dislike most of the 20th century urbanism. It is interesting intellectually, when applied on limited scale it is even interesting and nice to be in. But on the scale that it was deployed all over the world, often in a very lazy/stupid way it is hard not to generalize here.

I also like (and this is controversial around here) a few select brutalist buildings. The ones that make you go "wtf is this crazy dystopic movie set I'm walking through rn?". Few 🤔🫣🤣😂

I also like the old pre 20th century stuff, who doesn't? Just some of it is a bit boring when it's everywhere around you.