AHC: Kill the Fast Food Industry

[Simon Darkshade]

The rise of modern fast food was the confluence of postwar affluence, the car culture, mass production and a few related factors. Before these, there were still the base foods - hamburgers, fried chicken and what not preceded the 1950s advent of modern fast food - but with far more regional variance and little chains.

If not for Kroc, Sanders, Edgerton and McLamore, then it is likely that someone else would implement the ‘industrial’/‘modern’ approach to scaling takeaway foods into a mass business model. However, it isn’t an absolute given and there could be circumstances where there are more regional chains rather than the mass market dominant players.

As well as the drastic PoDs such as nuclear war and economic collapse, some individual ones could constrain the modern development of fast food and its deterioration in quality. These could come as some have suggested through legislation, personal changes ( the McDonald brothers knocking back Kroc would help the proposal; Sanders could hit some financial issues whilst he was still the man in charge) and some sort of moral panic/cultural backlash in response to food poisoning/sickness.

The real decade to look at is the 1955-1965 period - that is when the (fast food megacorps) die was cast.

Another more left field idea is to dilute the market a bit more with other players, such as a Midwest firm that keeps Burger King to the East and McDonalds to the West Coast, or with other foods, such as a hot dog restaurant or some sort of kebab.

Insofar as the types of fast food are concerned, they are limited to beef, pork and chicken, in that order; the reduction in cost of chicken through the advent of factory farming really starts to kick in during the 1960s, and pork had limits with regard to the (fairly minor) non-pork eating demographic.

So the likely path isn’t a single PoD, but a confluence of several different ones.

 

[Evil Crusader]

Hard agree with Kingfisher's points. I also believe that people are overestimating the impact of car culture - it likely postpones things, but the intersection of largely non-artisan economy and greater gender equality is always going to create a huge demand for cheap lunches regardless. I suppose technically nuclear war does prevent that, but I feel it's a cop-out answer.
And by 1950, it's very hard to prevent either, let alone both, of those factors from mattering.

 

[skycloud86]

Here in the UK, American fast food places first came here in the 1960s (the first one, KFC, was in my city) and nowadays most larger towns and cities have at least a few.

Without them, we would still have plenty of chippies (fish and chip shops) as well as takeaway places, but these would be focused more on Chinese, Indian and Caribbean cuisine. We have our own fast food places, but I'm not sure how likely they are to exist without the American influence.

Over there, I think it would slow down the obesity epidemic but at the same time, it might lead to a rise in popularity of microwaveable ready meals.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Now, the history of British food is one of my areas. Prior to the ‘arrival’ of McDonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken in 1974 and 1965, there was some limited consumption of hamburgers at Wimpy Bars/Grills, initially through Lyons’ Corner Houses and then as separate entities; they were served on plates with cutlery.

There were 35,000 fish and chip shops across the country in the 1930s, plenty of pie shops across London and in the postwar era, the rise of the greasy spoon/cafe ( https://thecritic.co.uk/hats-off-to-the-great-british-greasy-spoon/ ).

[ I will note that the article there does make a rather disparaging reference to the way with vegetables in wartime MoF British Restaurants, which isn’t necessarily accurate from a real food history point of view; the abuse of vegetables in cooking was more of a function of Mrs. Beaton.]

Let us divide restaurants and eating houses into three arbitrary categories:

1.) Upmarket
2.) Middle of the road
3.) Economy class

In the USA, there were more of Category 2.5 - 3 ‘neighbourhood restaurants’, on account of the different demography and history of various locales, but this wasn’t necessarily the case in Britain; there were some Italian places and a handful of Chinese restaurants in London and a few other cities, but food outside of the home was more the stuff of chophouses, inns and clubs in the English tradition.

Postwar, the ‘greasy spoon’ took on Category 3 quite well, and Category 1 was always there, but there was less of a middle category in the British practice. This would emerge later, as society changed, but after the period 1950-1975. Thus, when affluence improved by the 1960s (NHISG and all that), going out for a meal was a definite treat, be it in a newfangled Italian place, a Berni Inn, a Wimpy Bar or a McDonalds, in a manner different to the US.

Throw in a lack of car culture (a small factor, but a factor) and the cumulative impact of rationing, recovery and reaction to recovery and there was a very different background to British short order food.

The wider spread of Chinese, Indian and West Indian takeaways didn’t really kick in properly until the 1970s for the first two categories and much later for the third.

Without US restaurants and even without American foods such as the hamburger, we would still see British fast food, but in its own model/style.

 

[lynxpt]

Fast food has historically been relative rare in my homeland, that was because instead of wasting food on fast food, people drank alcohol instead.

When did fast food become popular in Denmark?

 

[Moglwi]

do not exempt the workers from minumin wage

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Guess I'd posted this in a earlier version of this thread. Don't see it here.

Theres nothing new about fast food in the US. In the 18th and 19th Centuries it was street vendors offering anything anyone would pay to eat. Tanahill in her book 'Food I History' describes the 'Baked Bean' vendors on Bostons streets. A cast Iron pot of beans cooked over night was carried around and customer could buy as much as they could afford for their Pennies. Bring your own bowl, or if the vendor was well supplied then a bowl and spoon a previous customer had used. The more prosperous and ambitious the vendor was the more items like Onion, scraps of meat, and spice went into the pot. If you had a five cent piece you could step into the nearby Bar of Saloon and for the price of a beer avail your self from the bowls of picked vegetables on the bar. A few pennnies more got you something hot from a stew pot, or perhaps some pickled meat. Other street vendors offered bits of meat toasted on sticks, Squirrel anyone? Or if you really wanted to splurge one of those refashioned Sandwich things.

Dinning cars on passenger rail roads were rare through most of the 19th Century, and often unaffordable. Some railways offered prefabricated item, the pickled vegetables again, cheap pastries, or sandwiches made and loaded on the train eight stops earlier. Most passengers on long distant trips ate at the numerous coal and water stops. The track side restaurants offered a limited 'fast' menu the passengers could order and eat in the ten or fifteen minute whistle stop. When the cooks heard a approaching passenger train they would toss dozens of eggs and meat on the stove and shovel out plates of hopefully cooked breakfast and grease to the passengers rushing in. Witness describe crowds gulping this and other fast cooked items down sitting on benches or standing until the call came to rebound. One timed the entry of the first passenger into the dinning room until the last departed as twelve minutes.

As paper became a cheap disposable item in the latter 19th Century food vendors started wrapping their wares in cheap Butchers Paper for ease in serving and customer consumption.

The Worlds Fairs that became very popular in the 19th Century were a hot bed of fast food. Where people could find exotic stuff like ground beef on a bread bun or Vienna sausages on a split Kaiser roll, or a square of baked pasta. If you really wanted to get out there a mix of cooked vegetables and Rice noodles called Chop Suey could be had.

 

[Jürgen]

When did fast food become popular in Denmark?

It depend on what we define as popular. But it was in the 50ties fast food became widespread, but really a major part of Danish culture I think we need to go to the 70ties, but at that point there was no chains and fast food was pretty much limited to hotdogs, burgers and Chinese food. In the 90ties pizzerias and burger chains (pretty much only McDonald) became widespread. Interesting as it expanded the daily consumption of alcohol fell.

Denmark has historically lacked an eating out culture, if you visit a German old fashion bar, they will also serve semi-traditional food (schnitzels). But in Denmark you only found the same with inns which was a more expensive eating place, where people didn’t eat regularly. So the only finished food Danes bought regularly were cold food (mostly open sandwiches), bread and cakes.

 

[Prof_Chemical]

how narrow or broad of a definition of fast food are we working with for this?

like others have said, streetfood, diaspora restaurants, these things behave differently to things like mcdonalds or kfc, but they still are fastfood.

my interpretation was "make eating out, more accessably and higher quality than otl, or less common than family and community cooking"

 

[Beatriz]

@KingSweden24

 

[Chapman]

how narrow or broad of a definition of fast food are we working with for this?

like others have said, streetfood, diaspora restaurants, these things behave differently to things like mcdonalds or kfc, but they still are fastfood.

my interpretation was "make eating out, more accessably and higher quality than otl, or less common than family and community cooking"

I’ve been trying to find a good way to phrase exactly what I mean, since clearly I was too broad with the OP. “Fast food” has existed for a long time, much longer than has even been noted here as I seem to recall some archaeological evidence that the Romans even had something that could arguably fall into the category of fast food.

Clearly it seems that killing all fast food just isn’t likely. Short of nuclear war, it will be a thing that exists in developed societies in many different forms. I guess what I’m looking for is a way to nerf the industry to the point where, say, McDonald’s would be a sight to see in some of the bigger cities and not very common in smaller towns. I mean, I live in a city with a population of not even 25,000 and we have four different McDonald’s locations.

Is it possible that rather than having the same big chains with multiple locations in the same small areas, we could isolate the big chains to cities? I’m imagining a trip to Los Angeles not being complete without a visit to the iconic Golden Arches, with McDonald’s being a tourist trap that wouldn’t be found in your average small town.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

In LA that would be In & Out. It is not possible to prevent the nationalization of 'fast food' as we know it without legislation that would prohibit or severely restrict the franchising system. 'Fast Food' would still exist, as it always has, but though a myriad of regional and local chains as well as independent outlets.

 

[nbcman]

Wider outbreaks of food contamination like the E Coli outbreak at Jack in the Box restaurants in the US in the 1990s followed by no changes to food hygiene / cooking recommendations because it would inconvenience businesses. People cut back or stop eating at fast food restaurants due to the risk of getting sick.

 

[farmerted555]

In LA that would be In & Out. It is not possible to prevent the nationalization of 'fast food' as we know it without legislation that would prohibit or severely restrict the franchising system. 'Fast Food' would still exist, as it always has, but though a myriad of regional and local chains as well as independent outlets.

Not to mention the fact that such legislation might be unconstitutional.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

That would depend on the SCOTUS of the time. I do recall that through the 50's some states had 'fair trade' laws that prohibited or severely restricted discount retailing. Personally I can not recall anything in the Constitution or the Amendements that would protect franchising.

 

[VadisDeProfundis]

I think that it is impossible to prevent the rise of fast food in and of itself, because it is tied up not only with post war affluence, but also with the situation that many working people find themselves in; not always easy to devote time an d effort to preparing and cooking food, and as long as you have long working hours and a portion of the population living paycheck to pay check/finding it difficult to plan and allocate time to food, some will turn to an "easy choice". But, as others have said, it's probably doable to restrict it or to curtail it; definitely when it comes to its internationalisation.

When McDonalds first attempted to open its store in Rome in the 80s, many people protested it very strongly, and they had the backing of the PCI. It was perceived as American cultural imperialism, and treated as something foreign. Similar views exist(ed) in the anti/alter globalisation movement, which also mounted critiques against industrialised farming practices and other things in the global food industry that make the business model of modern fast food corporations possible. So, a stronger anti-globalisation movement, or stronger anti-American sentiment in more countries in Europe and Latin America might at least delay the reach of American fast food companies. That still would leave the possibility for a domestic market to open up. Many countries might even promote domestic alternatives, but if this is coupled with stronger alter globalisation and peasant movements then maybe it could be significantly smaller.

Otherwise, it's reasonable to assume that reductions in working hours would translate to more people either cooking at home, or dining in places that look more like restaurants or taverns than fast food joints. More would likely take to cooking healthier meals or eating at places more expensive than what fast food offers if there were higher wages. If more states had sustained and well funded free school meal programs, then that might mean a drop in student fast food consumers.

So, all in all, while fast food would definitely still exist, and trends would favour it, stronger workers movements and successes for workers movements in terms of wage growth, policy successes such as a wider adoption of a 35 hour working week, stronger nationalism dressed as anti imperialism and anti-globalisation movements can probably undercut the prominence of the fast food industry worldwide.

 

[Analytical Engine]

I guess what I’m looking for is a way to nerf the industry to the point where, say, McDonald’s would be a sight to see in some of the bigger cities and not very common in smaller towns. I mean, I live in a city with a population of not even 25,000 and we have four different McDonald’s locations.

Here in the UK, there are just sooooooo many independent takeaways. My hometown (which has less than half the population of where you live) has more than a dozen of them*, all within walking distance of one another. That's in addition to a McDonald's and a KFC.

IMO, you could certainly have a lot more brands, none of which have the same level of market saturation that McDonald's or Burger King. Maybe you could get the big chains being largely a North American phenomenon,** with a bunch of much smaller chains and family-run fast food restaurants being more common in other countries


*from fish and chips, to pizza, to burgers, to kebabs - all pretty standard fare for the UK
**maybe a bunch of regional chains

 

[Jürgen]

Here in the UK, there are just sooooooo many independent takeaways. My hometown (which has less than half the population of where you live) has more than a dozen of them*, all within walking distance of one another. That's in addition to a McDonald's and a KFC.

IMO, you could certainly have a lot more brands, none of which have the same level of market saturation that McDonald's or Burger King. Maybe you could get the big chains being largely a North American phenomenon,** with a bunch of much smaller chains and family-run fast food restaurants being more common in other countries


*from fish and chips, to pizza, to burgers, to kebabs - all pretty standard fare for the UK
**maybe a bunch of regional chains

I think The best way to avoid the global dominance of American chains is to avoid WWII (preferable with a surviving Weimar). This would result in a less booming American economy in the fifties (through with a stronger economy in the forties), also resulting in stronger European economies, but also keep the influx of American troops from introducing American food.

 

[Lils <3]

Just have Colonel Sanders loose at Chickengrad and fail to defend the Kentucku Frying Oil Fields obviously

 

[LegionoftheUnitedStates]

will you accept restricting it to small chains by stronger sherman otherwise we remove the interstates would do a lot to weaken it. Furthermore many chains started in LA so judge doom or his real equivalent doesnt buy out LA public transit.

The movement for the Interstate Highway system was already well under way with the Interregional Highways report in 1944. Details might change, but you are not going to prevent the creation of a controlled access interstate highway system.