Article Critique

Introduction

Josh Klein is an expert in criminal justice from Iona College.  He has vast skills and knowledge in peace and conflict studies, security studies, social inequality, media, human rights and terrorism. He has produced a number of publications in survey research, quantitative and qualitative research methods. The author has majored in topics such as sociology, social policy, and academic writing. Cathy Lavery is also an expert in social policy discipline and has been instrumental both as an individual and co-author in several peer reviewed scholarly works.

The authors argue that criminal military action is often legitimized by state actors. From the article, it is evident that a feeling of national victimization is created by elite figures and politicians in society. The news media also tends to amplify the situation through rhetoric reporting. It is also interesting to mention that aggressive support for war, victimization and the Terrorism Victimization Index proposed by the researchers are closely related to each other. The article proposes a study that seeks to explore pertinent factors which propel war against terrorism. Findings from the Gallup poll indicate that war on terror has been heavily supported by the American public ever since the threat of terrorism became real in the face of humanity (Gibbs 183).  For instance, domestic approvals of the US military power and aggression against purported masterminds of terror have played significant roles in solidifying the US foreign policy on security. However, the domestic approval does not conform to the legal provisions of the US constitution.

In terms of the thesis, the authors skillfully navigate the broad objective of victimization and how the corporate sector promotes it. In particular, the ideological importance of both the state and corporate actors has been examined by the authors. In order to offer a conclusive and well-reasoned argument for the audience, the authors have developed the subject matter using a case study of the United States. The war on terrorism by the US since the advent of the new Millennium is a crucial framework in the research study because it augments the suggested framework.  Hence, it is evident that thesis development is appropriate throughout the peer reviewed article.

Evaluation

The introductory section of the research paper offers an in-depth background information of the topic. For instance, the reader is in a position to obtain a glimpse preview of the impacts of the United States’ security action on terrorism. The authors highlight the significance of the 2001 war in Afghanistan and the Iraqi invasion that took place 2 years later. These are vital background details that attempt to shed light on the entire act of legitimizing war through the latent policy of victimization (Gibbs 173). In addition, it is clearly evident that the empirical research findings from the American public regarding the war on terror are important pointers in the background information. The introductory section also offers the objectives of the research study, the primary research question, and theoretical backing of the study from past research findings. Needless to say, the aspect of ideology and how the corporate and state actors applies it when agitating for public affairs has been mentioned in the introductory section of the peer reviewed article. Moreover, the role played by the media is yet another vital section discussed in the research article. As a result, it is part and parcel of the background information. On the overall, adequate background information has been provided by the authors.

Both primary and secondary sources have been used to provide sufficient evidence in the research article. For example, a total of 49 reputable sources were consulted by the authors in the process of compiling evidence for the peer reviewed journal article. The sources used are mainly peer reviewed books and journals as well as empirical research studies from the field. In addition, primary sources such as opinion polls from Gallup and authoritative political publications have been used to supplement the evidence provided in the research article.

Although sufficient evidence has been used by the authors in the research article, one major setback can be visualized. Some of the sources used are apparently outdated. For instance, it is vital to mention that the research article was published in 2011. Hence, utilizing sources that date back to the 1990s may not be appropriate for this type of an ever-changing study. Politics and political ideologies are highly dynamic. Therefore, sources used should not be more than six years old in order to provide readers with the most updated pieces of evidence. The expert opinions provided in the research article have been drawn from both the primary and secondary sources.

The main purpose for writing the article is to sensitize the readers to understand how victimization language is applied by corporate and state actors in the process of pursuing specific goals or agenda. The authors have introduced a subject matter that has inadequately been appreciated by most readers of political publications. In any case, the underhand deals perpetuated by the corporate and state actors in the management of national affairs may not be strange to most people. However, the authors have used a social political theory in order to bring out the actual picture. It can also be argued out that “Legitimating War by Victimization” is an interesting take on a topic because the entire research article elicits a lot of reaction and counter arguments (Klein and Lavery 305).

In spite of a few logical fallacies noted in the research article, Klein and Lavery have employed objective reasoning and logical development of their arguments (302). Perhaps, the main logical fallacy can be witnessed in victimization by the media. The authors point out that news media can instigate terror victimization. Therefore, the terror victimization index was created from a pool of articles published in the United States. There is no indication whether the articles were sorted out. This magnitude of study demands the use of reputable news article and not mere personal opinions that may be significantly skewed. It is only the ‘victimization concern’ that makes use of survey measures from well known and credible sources (long-standing public sources). On a general note, the pieces of evidences provided are largely accurate bearing in mind that they have been backed by other credible sources.

The use of English language and structure of the research article are appropriate because of two main reasons. First, the vocabulary, sentence construction and choice of words definitely enable the targeted audience to comprehend the intended message. Second, there is logical development of the main argument throughout the research study.

To recap it all, it can be concluded that the research article offers detailed theoretical and empirical information on how public opinion and state actors may legitimize war crimes. Nonetheless, the authors can improve the article by utilizing updated sources and credible primary pieces of evidence when formulating socio-political theory.

Works Cited

Gibbs, Jennifer . “Looking at Terrorism through Left Realist Lenses.” Crime, Law and     Social Change 54.2 (2010): 171-185. Print.

Klein, Josh, and Cathy Lavery. “Legitimating War by Victimization: State-Corporate        Crime and Public Opinion.” Crime, Law and Social Change 56.3 (2011): 301-317. Print.