Case fucking closed, shitters

>implying Eater is worth two shits in a squirrel's mouth

I don't give a shit if you're putting beans in your chili at home, but if you're in a chili competition, or feeding a crowd, you'd better fucking NOT put beans in there. THAT is the sacrilege, when you assume that everyone likes beans in chili. I've been cooking chili for over twenty years, both at home, for crowds, and for competitions. At home, I'll throw a couple cans of Ranch Style beans in my everyday chili to stretch it. But I would NEVER FUCKING EVER serve beans in chili to a restaurant crowd or even at a fucking picnic. People expect meat in chili, they don't always want or expect beans. And at chili competitions, they'll run you right the fuck out.
GET YOUR SHIT STRAIGHT, PEOPLE.

I always use beans, they taste awesome in chili.

Then what the hell is chili sin carne? Tomato soup?

Beans and corn always go in my chili

I don't give a rats ass what some snob in texas says, my chili is delicious

calm down bro jesus christ

chili autism is one of the worst autisms on Veeky Forums

>corn

Aight nigga now you gone done it

I want to go to a chili competition, puree some beans into a fine paste, mix it into my chili, and then when I win, laugh at everyone for saying that beans in chili was the best.

I'll still take it over roaming packs of /tv/ and /pol/ shitposters running their shit 'emes into the 'ound.

>/pol/ shitposters
No.
>fapping in /gif/ the other day
>working it with one hand while scrolling with the other
>someone posted one of those "DA JEWZ" webms in
I'd rather have /s4s/ or /b/ leak into other boards than /pol/. It's literally cancer.

are you 12

go back to wherever the fuck you came from

Shit, I better listen to you, then. I'd hate to break the laws of the chili community and wind up before the great chili conclave awaiting judgment.

I will no longer put beans in my chili from now on. Thank you, great chili sheriff.

>go back to wherever the fuck you came from
I'm from here but since you really hate my post there's only one place for you:

>add beans and that makes it stew
God you are retarded

They would know. Do you really think the judges can't tell when there's bean puree in it? Good way to get an ass stomping.

This boy's about as sharp as a bag of wet mice.

Mice have very sharp teeth.

...

What kind of schmuckatelli puts beans in a 'go 'za?

I like mice, they're very cute

>serves with fritos
fucking disgusting

it's stew regardless ya dip.

What is the difference between this and a sloppy joe without bread.

yeah this. when authentic just means less good and less nutrition what the fuck is the point

>he's never had a frito pie
wew lad

>beans in chili
>corn in chili
>carrots in chili
>coffee in chili
>beer in chili
>chicken stock in chili
>tomato sauce in chili

YOURE DOING IT WRONG

I never been my chili. Beans really bland the flavor and the meat and spices. Why even bother seasoning it when you ad beans? I mean, if you wanted beans just eat the beans. I want chili. And maybe my wife wants chili cheese fries and my daughter wants nachos. Some chili was never meant to be beaned.

>chili was never meant to be beaned.

chili was meant as a cheap as fuck stew for hungry cowboys, the base was always the same but they'd stretch it with things for a meal. that's where the fuck people got the idea to put beans in it in the first place you fucking fuckerface.

>I decide what's more important about chili
>even though I'm in no way connected to the origins of the food nor am I a big enough chef from the region to have any real importance

That doesn't mean that chili has beans
That doesn't mean that when they mixed chili and beans together it wasn't just some other variant of bean stew

the grilled cheese is a very cheap and fun food to make, but you can't put ham and mustard on a grilled cheese and still call it a grilled cheese

This guy gets it. When you change the ingredient, you get something different.

What about beans on a pizza? According to your retarded logic it wouldn't be called a pizza anymore but a stew.

That logic only follows if you're a retard
When you add toppings to a cheese pizza, nobody calls it a "cheese pizza" even though it most definitely still has all the ingredients that make up a cheese pizza
Nobody would that a cheese pizza with beans, because even if they had to specify, they'd probably say pizza with beans as a topping because people could easily assume the crust was made out of beans or the sauce was some sort of bean compound

tl;dr, chili with beans isn't really chili

*would call

>beans on pizza

I think I know what's goin on here.

this is a chili . if you add anything to it , it is no longer a 'chili' .

>NYTimes food reviewer
>nobody

shut your whore mouth before I hit you right in the Lucas Peterson.

That's a chili pepper also known as chili (pepper)
It's an ingredient in chili (con carne) which is also abbreviated to chili
But if you wanted to have a meal of only chili peppers, if you added anything to the chili peppers, it wouldn't be chili peppers
It would be chili peppers and something else

>When you add ingredients to a chili, nobody calls it a "chili with extra ingredients" even though it most definitely still has all the ingredients that make up a chili

Think about it, you massive autist.

What a horrible existence. Why would I give a shit what a bunch of Texans think? Chili is meat and beans and whatever the fuck else.

If you weren't retarded, you'd understand that I'm making a point to say that calling it chili is badong and that you shouldn't even call it chili with extra ingredients because it's still badong
Because chili is the only situation where that happens

>make fun of americans
>in a thread about american food, on an american website, built by an american
so why are you here?

Is this what autism is like? Can't say I've ever had a chili without beans in it.

This would be like a Canadian getting upset for poutine with anything other than gravy, fries and curds. But you can add other things and it can still be poutine.

Uhh, I dunno man. A grilled cheese has it's title describe what it is. It's cheese and it's grilled and there's already a name for what it becomes if you add ingredients, a melt.

Chili has been made for years and years with beans or corn or both and I feel like the definition of chili has changed with that. If I load up my chili with beans it's certainly not a stew.

>I feel like the definition of chili has changed with that
I feel like the definition of chili has never actually changed

> If I load up my chili with beans it's certainly not a stew
I feel like it is

The definition of stuff gets changed all the time. And if enough people call it chili with beans in it then it's still chili.

I've never put beans in a stew. Like if you want to call it a stew you can, but Im gonna call it a chili.

serving chili with beans is like serving chinese food OVER rice. rice is a palate cleanser. beans dilute the flavor if mixed in, they dont add to the flavor or texture. my chile is made with sliced jalapenos, tons of ancho chile powder and new mexico chile powder (both mild or moderately hot), a little cayenne for heat, a little tomato, cocoa, beef broth, garlic, and i go for cheap meat: ground beef or ground turkey. the key is so much chile powder that the sauce is thick, pasty and dark red to brown. serve with chopped onion, cilantro, grated cheese, i guess i would like fritos too. i remember my first chile style: california hippie style, lots of tomatos, bell peppers, onions, beans, a tiny pinch of cayenne. watery, flavorless, i guess good for you.

ill try stew meat sometime to make it really good.

if kidney beans in my chili is wrong i dont wanna be right

corn in chile, or corn in salsa, is like corn in a turd. stands out nicely, doesnt improve the flavor.

Chinese people eat shit over rice all the fucking time. Seriously, that was probably the worst fucking example you could have thought of, and it was your first sentence.

The definition of stuff rarely changes
It's more common for words to be invented to describe something than for a word to gain a new meaning simply because people want to call it that
If enough people say something isn't something, then isn't that just as adequate?

I've never willingly put beans in chili. Like, if you want to make stew with chili ingredients and beans, you can, but I'm not going to call it chili

No one gives a shit, this is seriously one of the most retarded things to get into a huff about. Not just in the food and culinary world but in general.

You are actually getting angry and defensive that people put an extra ingredient in a food that you like.

Because it's chili. Like, order it in any diner, and you'll most likely get ground beef and beans. This argument is fucking stupid, as the decision has already been made.

Why don't you go sperg out about New England vs Manhattan Chowder while you're at it?

order nachos at any ballpark and you'll get salty oily chips dressed with yellow cheese product
doesn't make it good, doesn't make it the first thing people think of when they think of nachos, doesn't make it right, doesn't make those things actually nachos

>New England vs Manhattan Chowder
You mean two clearly distinct styles containing different ingredients so blatant it's reflected in the sheer color of the soups?
yes, this is probably the exact same thing
now you could have said, I dunno, cheesesteaks with or without, but no, give a terrible example

>cheesesteaks with or without
or cheesesteaks, provolone versus wiz

I think that was his point. Chili with beans is like Chinese foods over rice. It's a filler which soaks up the flavors. And I agree with him, which is one reason why don't add beans to my chili either. Now, if someone wanted to put chili over beans in their bowl, that would be one thing (much like putting chili on a hot dog or whatever). But beans don't belong cooked IN the chili.

Mexico is the home of chili
Chili does not have beans
i bet you put tomato in your enchilada sauce too

>doesn't make those things actually nachos
It literally does. Words are defined by common usage. Origins aren't at all relevant.

Texas Chili Parlor sucks and serves beans with chili--look at their menu. Lucy's has better chili and their specialty is fried chicken.

TCP didn't used to suck, back in the old days. I used to eat there back in the 80s (yes, I'm fucking old, so what) and their chili was good. It's changed hands since then, and the chili has changed too. It's someone else riding on a reputation that they didn't earn. Fuck 'em. Same with Threadgills. That place was fucking awesome back in the day, but it's trash now since it changed hands. Fuck them too. And fuck Austin anyway, it sucks now. NOW GET OFF MY LAWN, YOU MEDDLING KIDS.

Amen. That's all you had to say. Threadgills made me sad. I heard about it and Hoover's most of my life and they sucked.

Eating here can be very depressing.

>in re: webm
jesus iowa get it together

In the Netherlands we actually do

Allright then, bean stew chili style. As if I give a fuck.

>muh pure authentic recipe
Go kill yourselves sperg lords. No one gives a fuck. If you want to deprive yourself of a tasty and healthy legume for the mere fact that it makes a recipe "authentic" then go ahead.

You just don't fucking get it, do you? Just GTFO.

>adding a single ingredient to an otherwise identical dish makes it a completely different dish
I guess we should all sit down and come up with common names for every single possible combination of ingredients and cooking styles. We could invite the whole world and we would still be here forever.

I bet you guys think using parmesan means it isn't carbonara. How about if my plate hasn't been atomically sterilised and preserved in a vacuum, does my dish take a new name when I serve it? You autists believe this.

Tejano here.

Just because white people don't like beans doesn't mean you can take it out of the recipe and claim it as your own.

No poor tejano or actual cowboy would have eaten a pure meat meal, when beans are a cheap way to bulk out chili.

Anti bean autism is just the white man trying to impose his autism. Beans are acceptable.

Nailed it.

sweet corn has a very different flavor from everything else that goes in chili, not to mention the texture

corn is among the best things to add to chili

You might want to look into the chili queens of San Antonio. I think you may be ignorant of your Tejano heritage. Here's an original chili queen recipe from the Institute of Texan Culture in San Antonio, take note of the last line.

Ingredients:

2 lbs beef shoulder, cut into ½-inch cubes

1 lb pork shoulder, cut into ½-inch cubes

¼ cup suet

¼ cup pork fat

3 medium-sized onions, chopped

6 garlic cloves, minced

1-quart water

4 acho chiles

1 serrano chile

6 dried red chiles

1 Tablespoon comino seeds, freshly ground

2 tablespoons Mexican oregano

Salt to taste

Place lightly floured beef and pork cubes in with suet and pork fat in heavy chili pot and cook quickly, stirring often. Add onions and garlic and cook until they are tender and limp. Add water to mixture and simmer slowly while preparing chiles. Remove stems and seeds from chile and chop very finely. Grind chiles in molcajete and add oregano with salt to mixture. Simmer another 2 hours. Remove suet casing and skim off some fat. Never cook frijoles with chilies and meat. Serve as separate dish.

>one recipe says no beans
wow okay I guess they're right I'm going to go ahead and stop putting beans in my chili this very instant

If you really think you're changing anyone's opinion by being a stickler about the definition then you're sorely mistaken.

Texas guy is right
Check em

no, you check 'em

>adding meat to your chili

Why not call it what it is: meat chili

Real chili is liquified chilies with whole chilies in it.

Texan here. Lived here 33 years.

I've seen people get in fistfights over their brand of beer. Their brand of dip (chewing tobacco). Someone 'disrespecting their truck'.

...but nobody seems to really care to that degree about chili. Everyone has their own recipe. Some use beans, some don't. But there's never much contention about it.

Literally the only dish I like beans in is chili.

Then I found out faggots on the internet complain about that.

Chili without beans is Sloppy Joes.

nothing to see here, move along

>ctrl + f
>no cumin

this thread is aids

my bad, i see comino

Yep. Goddamn califags and Yankees drinking up all our water.

It's not just one recipe, it's one of the oldest recipes from where chili originated and is typical of the chili in that area.

>nytimes
>having credibility

not in this day and age

>Austin
>Texas

Pick ONE.

real chili doesn't have tomatoes in it either but you fuckin steers and queers dont have a WORD to say about that, so stfu

Actually we DO. Tomatoes don't belong in chili, either, faggot. But no one want to start board shitposting about that, so beans are always the only thing that gets brought up. SUCK IT.

no beans = bolognese

I visited friends all over Texas a number of times, and Austin is literally the only place in Texas I'd ever willingly spend another day in.

>cheese
>crackers

LMAO

lol. That is funny.

Chili is an ancient Mesoamerican BEAN and chili pepper stew, any other ingredients (meat, corn, etc.) are optional.

If it doesn’t have beans, it’s not chili.