Abstract
In Punishment for the Greater Good, Adam Kolber defends consequentialism as a better justification for punishment than retributivism. Here, we reject the dichotomy and seek to motivate expressivism as a genuine alternative. According to expressivism, what justifies punishment is its expression of a fitting message. We show how expressivism can be developed to avoid Kolber's objections to retributivism, while having a number of advantages over his preferred consequentialism.