I think a lot of creators' idea of minimalism is doing the least work possible.
Like, maybe to a painter, a minimalist painting is a gray square. To a game dev, a minimalist game is a blank game, which is arguably impossible. Web developers think the most minimalist website would look like this (visit that!). As someone who strives to have a "minimalist" website, I disagree.
I think there's a distinction between development minimalism, and user minimalism, and the example website displays a lot of the former, and less of the latter. Yes, as a web developer, I know that this linked example has no "CSS," and it is therefore more "default."
But the user doesn't know what CSS is! All the user sees is the website. For them, they expect there to be text, and images, and links, and for those things to be simple to look at. A website without CSS is capable of those things, but they all look bad. The text has serifs, the images are left-aligned, and the length of each line is super long (also, IMO, the links look ugly). It's true that this CSS-less website has fewer things, but that paradoxically translates to more "things" in the user's brain, and therefore less "user minimalism"
And that's fine! If what you want is development minimalism. But I think a lot of people, myself included, strive for user minimalism in some designs. And we should remember that often involves making things slightly more complicated on our end, so the user doesn't have to deal with it.
So this is why the text is an imbedded instance of Roboto, and why the links don't have underlines or color changes, and why you clicked on a button to see this blog post. It's not minimalist because it's what the browser defaults to, it's minimalist because to the user, it should be.