Andrew Arato is Dorothy Hirshon Professor in Political and Social Theory at the New School for Social Research in New York. He earned his Ph.D. in History at University of Chicago in 1975, dealing with Marxist Thought; 20th Century Intellectual History and the History of East Europe. He has been speaker and earned a Specialist Grant for Constitutionalism and Civil Society Projects in Harare, Zimbabwe, in November 2010 and in Nepal, in August-September 2006. Both provided by the U.S. Department of State. He was also Fulbright Distinguished Professor in American Studies in Frankfurt, Germany, in 2007-8.

Publications:

Major books:

(2017) Adventures of the Constituent Power: Beyond Revolution?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

(2016) Post Sovereign Constitution Making: Learning and Legitimacy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

(2009) Constitution Making Under Occupation. The Politics of the Imposed Revolution in Iraq, New York: Columbia University Press.

(2000) Civil Society, Constitution and Legitmacy, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield

(1998) con Michel Rosenfeld. Habermas on Law and Democracy  Critical Exchanges, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.

(1993) From Neo-Marxism to Democratic Theory: Essays on the Critical Theory of Soviet-Type Societies, New York: M.E. Sharpe.

 

Volumes honoring his work:

(2013) Enrique Peruzzotti and Martín Plot (Eds.), Critical Theory and Democracy: Civil Society, Dictatorship, and Constitutionalism in Andrew Arato´s Democaratic Theory, Routledge.

Johan Van der Walt (2010) Constitution Making as Learning Process: Andrew Arato’s Model of Post Sovereign Constitution Making, en: South African Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 26, pp. 1-18.

 

CALAS research project:

Title: The U.S. Role in Constitution Making in Former Spanish Possessions: Mexico, Philippines and Cuba

Abstract: In the context of a large scale study of the external role in domestic constitution making, this project will examine the very special U.S. role in three former Spanish colonial possessions in the 20th Century. That role can be located in spectrum from very high involvement (Philippines) to Central but more limited role (Cuba) and finally toa case with low formal role but a source of strong informal pressure that involved both military and economic forms (Mexico) I will focus on the actual processes, as well as the consequences of the possibility of constitutionalism and democracy. I will examine the documents as well as other primary sources, and will compare some of the most important later interpretations. In particular I will try to compare U.S. based reflection with ones coming from each of the three polities. Finally, I will reflect on the different approaches of American, British and French authorities to empire and decolonization on the constitutional level.