However, if you get away from the "tourist" spots, every place is unique and does offer something interesting to experience.
My wife and I were driving back to our rental in France from someplace and stopped for lunch at the only restaurant we could find in the little town in the middle of I have no idea where we were. Very little English spoken (we don't speak French, but can manage with a few words and technology) and had a very enjoyable meal and a little sightseeing in this small town.
Not saying that everyone enjoys that kind of thing, but if someone travels to Paris, for example, and has their sights only set on the popular things, Eiffel Tower, Louvre, etc. They're missing so much more to the city. Yes, certainly plan on seeing what's popular because that's why you went there, but also spend at least half the time exploring the little gems that every city offers that unique to it.
And for the love of everything, don't eat at places you can eat at home every meal just because you know it.
As an example, one thing I do enjoy is finding and visiting quirky little museums. The sort that might only be a couple of rooms worth of items. By nature each one is a new experience for me. But if I take a more abstract view I could say "I'm just looking at another quirky little museum".
Sometimes they're vibrant little untouched spots on the map - sometimes they're little dried up outposts of humanity, with some grand buildings left as testament that people once believed this place would prosper, and that there was money here at some point.
It's something I've always wondered at - you go out to rural america, there are a ton of small towns with really grand buildings in them, clear evidence that there was capital there at one point - and now its all gone - where and why did it go? The when is obvious usually, the other two, not as much. Thats an aside however.
I'll defend eating at the familiar when tired or worn out, but I do suggest trying the local color, you never know what you'll find out there - it might be good or bad, but it will almost certainly be memorable.
To me traveling isn't about visiting different places. It is about opening up to the unexpected. Something we don't do so easily when following an itinerary.
In the South, its (depending on where) Black folks, in Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma, its Hispanic.
The fact that I see mexican/hispanic restaurants and groceries, in rural america (even in the south) tells me the world is changing.
Imo there should be a cultural exchange program where you students in cities and send them to rural schools for a semester and vice versa via exchanges. It's important to the American experience to be able to understand both worlds if we are going to continue to coexist in a union.
I've long believed in some form of mandatory national service, just to encourage this - it would also decrease the risk for military adventurism if the military was a broader cross-section of society.
Of course, there was that time after a long drive, we stopped at KFC in France because my wife loves their mashed potatoes. KFC in France does not have mashed potatoes and I ate undercooked chicken which kept me in bed for almost a week (we were there for 5 weeks, so luckily were able to absorb that downtime).
Not to dissuade anyone from travel. ;-)
So if rural America is gradually becoming that way, and thereby the rest of the world following suit, I guess the reason to travel would be to experience different cultures before they effectively come to us all (or disappear all together in some cases). But that's really more curiosity than anything else, like visiting a traveling museum exhibit that has a limited run.
However, I must admit I may be wrong in my interpretation of this, and now I want to ask my dad again next time I see him.
It is a great idea, nevertheless.