arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Striking and the means principle

James Christensen

Politics, Philosophy & Economics2025https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594x251317189article
ABDC B
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

Some strikes seem insufficiently discriminating. Rather than being aimed exclusively at potentially ‘legitimate’ targets (e.g., employers who, by refusing to pay a fair wage or provide acceptable working conditions, might have made themselves liable to bear certain costs), these strikes are (also) aimed at individuals who do not seem to be liable. Most problematically, such strikes invite the charge that they harm the innocent opportunistically or exploitatively . (Call this the third-party (exploitation) objection .) In other words, those who strike face the charge that they are harmfully using the innocent as a means to further their own ends, thereby violating a central and enduring principle of deontological ethics, namely, the means principle . This paper aims to set out the best case that can be made for the third-party (exploitation) objection.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594x251317189

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{james2025,
  title        = {{Striking and the means principle}},
  author       = {James Christensen},
  journal      = {Politics, Philosophy & Economics},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594x251317189},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Striking and the means principle

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.