se fortalece un

nacionalismo maniqueo, con la excesiva veneración de héroes, símbolos e historia

funcionales a la dictadura porfirista“una forma de acción o práctica social, política y cultural

que es construida simbólicamente y tiene un carácter interpretativo y relacional” (Troncoso
y Piper 2015, p. 67) https://www.ssc.cdmx.gob.mx/secretaria/estructura/1 La diferencia entre
uno y otro ámbito la define Nora (1985, 8) de la siguiente manera “Memory and history, far
from being synonymous, appear now to be in fundamental opposition. Memory is life,
borne by living societies founded in its name (…) Memory is a perpetually actual
phenomenon, a bond tying us to the eternal present; history is a representation of the past.”
These discourses imagined the nation as
realized in economic progress and modern political institutions, while embracing a project
of whitening the population and conceiving “the Indian” as the key obstacle to national
unity
and development (Knight, 1990, 1992; Vaughan, 1982).
“Statues or monuments to the dead, for instance, owe their meaning to their intrinsic
existence; even though their location is far from arbitrary, one could justify relocating them
without altering their meaning. Such is not the case with ensembles constructed over time,
which draw their meaning from the complex relations between their elements” (Nora 1989,
22)