[adventured]

> American condiments can stand to learn from global condiments

There's no such thing as American condiments, unless you pretend the US is homogeneous (which it isn't remotely close to being). Maybe you kinda sorta could have pigeonholed the US like that 40-50 years ago. I don't think it's possible to label-standardize as it pertains to food in the US any longer (as though there's American food at this point), given the diversity in the US now and the large variance between regions, states, cities.

[jjav]

> unless you pretend the US is homogeneous

The US is (sadly) extremely homogeneous because it's the same few dozen brands that are ever-present everywhere. You can be air-dropped blindfolded into a strip mall anywhere in the country and there will be no way to tell where you are since it'll be the exact same chain-food.

> Maybe you kinda sorta could have pigeonholed the US like that 40-50 years ago.

Strange comment because 40-50 years ago it was quite the opposite. A few nationwide-chains existed already, but every town had a local flavor and nearly all restaurants were local. It was fun to travel town to town experiencing the differences. Today it's the same everywhere. Very dull.

[thatcat]

America has a fairly homogeneous culture though. There are chains of franchises everywhere and many monopolies in the supply chains. There are is also an independent element, but let's not pretend that the homogenized choice isn't extremely popular.

[skeletal88]

I am happy that we don't have Starbucks here. We have our own cafe chains. We don't need the us franchises to colonize the globe, we want local variety.

[iammisc]

In terms of cuisine, America is not really homogeneous. I mean, even a relatively moderate change from LA to SF means a change from heavy Hispanic influence to more Asian. Or a change from SF to Portland and you get a lot more traditional 'American' (which really means Northeastern, since the South, Southwest, and California is very different foodwise), but with a heavy 'natural' emphasis.

Certainly, we have access to the same stuff, and many of us enjoy similar food, but I mean, Californians put avocado on everything, and you're not going to get Gumbo in Seattle.

America has a national food culture that kind of exists on top of the local one.

[fragmede]

Your post reveals your eating habits. :) There are tons of chain restaurants that exist in both SF and LA, as well as nationally. There's no shortage of chain food options. McDonalds, Chipotle, Applebee's, Denny's, Pizza Hut, Chili's, and on and on. Your budget and palate may allow you the luxury of never eating in those kinds of places, but to say America is not really homogeneous because you choose not to frequent those kinds of places, ignores the reality of the many many chain restaurants who's appeal is the consistency of dining experience.

[iammisc]

I agree that you can eat a homogeneous diet in america. On long drives, I often find myself at one of these places precisely for consistency.

However, most Americans do not cook the way fast food restaurants produce food. Also, chains differ. For example, in the south, there are often different proportions of chains. Most people eat their local diet.

I notice it all the time. Contrary to popular belief, these 'ethnic' places are not expensive or fancy. When I lived in California, I often ate at cheapo Mexican restaurants and cheap asian ones. Now that I live in Oregon, I often find myself at cheapo pub fare type places or food trucks serving Lebanese food.

Cuisines change a lot across the country. The fast food system is a homogeneous layer superimposed on top of that. Most people do not eat that everyday.

[unholythree]

No, I’m pretty sure it’s getting worse. Anecdotally about 10 years ago when out-of-towners would ask where the closest Starbucks was, I’d proudly say there’s just the one at the convention center. Now my mid sized city is infested with them despite already having a few regional chains and dozens of independent shops.