heir evaluation, I think of the following chain:
*General description of the idea
*More specific form of the idea, with theory attached
*Legal implementation of the idea
*Institutional enforcement/support of the idea
*Institutional culture for those institutions
*Individual actors within those institutions
Criticism of how society works should, in my opinion, try to be clear which (one or more) of these are being addressed. For example, in the first case, if you're criticising capitalism or socialism, are you criticising its necessary/intrinsic characteristics (the first part of the chain) or its specific form (the second part)? If you're criticising police action, are you criticising a specific policeman, are you criticising what you believe to be a police culture that enables/suggests that kind of action, or are you criticising the basic idea of police?
Clarity on these is important in analysis.