Although I don’t share quite the same vitriol, I understand the sentiment. I’m kinda numb to City winning things atm (unless they’re directly competing with us) because I still haven’t fully accepted them as a peer yet. Let alone a genuine rival in the wider cultural context.
I’m under no illusion that it’ll eventually happen. When the memory of their propulsion fades a little, and they’ve won enough to have carved out a respectable legacy of sorts (Chelsea, for example, are now the 4th most successful club in England, and the only London side to win the CL, so it’s pointless pretending they’re still a plastic franchise.)... but right now, I still partially see them as the club who copied the Poznan and bought Barcelona’s backroom staff in an attempt to fast track their identity.
It’s slowly eroding, and will inevitably continue to. Like the idea of Newcastle or Blackburn as rivals did. But for now it’s still less of a deal to me than it probably should be. I celebrated City beating Pool to the league in ‘15 because it didn’t feel like a significant event. It didn’t stir anything in me. It was almost like a write off, as daft as that sounds.
I’d imagine a lot of the neutral love for them stems from a similar point of (current) indifference. United have been the big bad of the PL for decades, beating sides and making enemies of a whole generation of fans. It makes perfect sense that most clubs would harbour more ill will toward us than a relative upstart they don’t have countless bad memories of. Even if they are evil. People voted for the irrational evils of Brexit & Trump just to plant one on the supposed elites of the status quo.
And yes, in this hastily formed metaphor, we’re the elite, and City are Trump. I’m going with that now.
Also it’s easier to gain favour with the neural when you play really good football, obviously. But I could probably lazily equate that to populist dog whistle rhetoric, or something. You fill in the blanks.