If this sparked a thought, challenged an assumption, or made you #hungry in a complicated way—mission accomplished.
Let’s keep questioning how culture #circulates, transforms, and returns.

Feel free to share, comment, or reach out—this conversation is just getting started

Some may see it as innovation, others as appropriation. But we’re all witnessing a broader debate: Who gets to define what counts as “Mexican”?

Chipotle won’t just sell burritos. It’ll sell a narrative. And within that story, the local, the hybrid, and the global collide. What role will Mexico play in that script?

It brings to mind a notable precedent: the failed attempt by #TacoBell to penetrate the Mexican market. Its early exit showed that simply labeling something as “Mexican #food” is not enough to gain cultural acceptance.

Bhabha described the “third space”—a zone of ambiguity where cultures intersect and are reshaped. Chipotle may become such a space, where Mexican-ness turns into brand and spectacle.

From a critical lens, Chipotle’s arrival reveals deep tensions around identity, representation, and cultural hegemony in a globalized wor

Can a Mission burrito compete with your neighborhood taquería? Maybe not in flavor—but in global branding, the competition is real.

We’ve seen this before: #TacoBell tried entering the Mexican market but failed. Why? Because using the label “Mexican food” isn’t enough to gain cultural acceptance at home.

This is a case of inverted cultural return: a reconfigured version of the Mexican comes back to its country of origin—transformed by global consumption logics.

Chipotle doesn’t represent traditional Mexican cuisine. It offers a standardized, health-conscious, and “cool” version of what the U.S. markets as “Mexican food.” But what happens when that returns to Mexico?