It’s time for Muslims and allies to vote with principle, not fear.

Zia Ahmad, writing in AMUST, expresses a fear many Muslims share: that withdrawing support from Labor could empower Peter Dutton. He does not explicitly call on Muslims to vote for Labor, but his article strongly urges “strategic” voting to avoid what he sees as a worse outcome – Dutton’s rise to power. By warning against “rage clouding judgment”, fracturing the Muslim voting bloc, and alienating potential allies, his message is clearly shaped by a fear that protest votes might misfire and deliver government to the Coalition.

That fear is not baseless – Dutton’s record on refugees, surveillance, Palestine, and Islamophobia is deeply concerning. But the flaw lies not in the concern, but in the conclusion. Strategic voting should empower communities to extract real concessions, not entrench loyalty to parties that repeatedly fail them. Right now, it feels like we’re being asked to shield those who have not shielded us.

Zia warns that Muslim rage could backfire. But perhaps the greater danger is resignation. Believing our only power lies in choosing between two inadequate parties is a trap. Remaining loyal to those who harm us may be the most dangerous choice of all.

Australia’s political system offers options

Unlike the US, Australia’s voting system — compulsory voting, preferential ballots, and proportional Senate representation — prevents the major parties from completely monopolising power. Our democracy allows small constituencies and independents to meaningfully influence national policy. A more fluid political system exists – if we choose to use it.

The major parties should not expect loyalty without accountability. Their track record includes:

• Voting against condemning genocide;
• Silencing Senator Fatima Payman for speaking out on Palestine; and
• Expanding a surveillance state that disproportionately targets Muslims.

Backing either major party without extracting policy commitments is not strategic – it’s surrender.

This isn’t an emotional overreaction. It’s a rational withdrawal from parties that fail their own ideals. More than 30% of Australians now reject both major parties, and this trend is rising. Muslims are not alone in facing the fallout from major party policies – migrants, First Nations peoples, the poor and other marginalised groups are also harmed.

Labor and the Coalition both bow to powerful interests: fossil fuels, gambling, alcohol, tech giants, finance, the US and the Israeli lobby. As they appease these forces, everyday people suffer here and abroad.

Red Lines crossed

Neither major party has passed basic ethical tests on Palestine, racial justice, or civil liberties. Both recently rejected the Red Lines Package, comprising:

1. The genocide risk reporting bill – Requiring defence companies to report genocide risks in their supply chains;
2. The divesting from Illegal settlements bill – Preventing Australian funds from supporting businesses in illegal Israeli settlements; and
3. The defence trade controls amendment bill – Banning arms exports linked to genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity.

These measures were minimal moral thresholds. Both major parties failed them.

A staggering 85% of Labor MPs voted against condemning genocide in Gaza, while approving $22 billion in arms deals with companies enabling it. Domestically, they’ve preserved offshore detention, increased ASIO powers, and passed counter-terror laws targeting Muslim youth.

At the same time, symbolic access — Eid visits, mosque events, roundtables — has provided a sense of visibility. But when that access demands silence on injustice, it becomes complicity. We must demand more than photo-ops. Real political engagement requires principles, not proximity.

Realignment, not protest

The rejection of the Red Lines Package must be a wake-up call. Independents and minor parties that support justice must be prioritised on the ballot, with both Labor and Liberal pushed down – though still ranked above far-right extremists. This strategy reduces funding and legitimacy for the duopoly.

We must:

• Build alliances with First Nations, refugee, and climate justice groups;
• Pressure Greens and other minor parties to adopt stronger stances; and
• Elevate principled independents like Fatima Payman and Dai Le.

This is not protest voting – it’s realignment. It’s how we deny the major parties a blank cheque.

A minority government could be a good thing

A hung parliament — where either major party governs with support from independents and progressive parties — could be Australia’s best outcome. It might rein in the rightward drift of the major parties and restore some ethical grounding.

Payman’s stand was more than symbolic. When asked to vote against her conscience on Gaza, she refused. Labor didn’t debate her – they punished her. “When the party asks you to betray your conscience, it’s not a party you can fix,” she said. That wasn’t rhetoric. It was truth, born of experience.

Both major parties support the same wars, pass the same surveillance laws and maintain the same detention regimes. They legislate cruelty and criminalise children. Muslim teens with autism or disabilities are jailed in maximum-security prisons under “anti-terror” laws – without having committed violence or even intended harm.

This isn’t about safety. It’s about control.

The “Lesser Evil” lie

The idea that rejecting the major parties empowers Dutton is a fear-based trap. Let’s look at the facts:

• Labor and the Coalition have not meaningfully protected Muslims or other vulnerable groups;
• Concessions only come when seats are at risk. Dai Le’s win in Fowler proves that; and
• Alternatives exist. Mehreen Faruqi’s advocacy in the Senate shows the power of bold principled voices.

The major parties didn’t just inherit bad policies – they’ve made new ones. They backed AUKUS. They kept offshore detention. They enabled mass surveillance. These are not passive continuations – they are active choices.

Yes, a Dutton Government would escalate harm. But fear of that cannot justify loyalty to those already enabling injustice. We must prepare — legally, politically, socially — to resist repression from any government.

Unity built on fear isn’t unity. It’s silence. And silence in the face of genocide and repression is complicity.

A better way forward

Support community-led candidates Back independents and progressives who take real stances — not just token positions — on Palestine, civil liberties, and Islamophobia.

Organise swing blocs Unite with First Nations, refugee, union and climate groups to hold the majors accountable.

Reject the ’lesser evil’ myth Harm reduction must not mean accepting harm. MPs who enable war crimes must not be rewarded with votes.

Stop trading dignity for promises We must vote with conscience and build power – not proximity to power.

No more crumbs. No more silence.

The lesson of Fatima Payman, the Red Lines Package, and decades of betrayal is clear: the rigged system must be challenged. Lesser “evilism” is not liberation. Our path lies in courage, clarity and collective power.

Well-funded campaigns like Advance Australia spend millions to destroy minor parties that speak up. Let’s respond not with fear, but with strategy.

We must vote not to reduce harm – but to build power. Our communities deserve no less.

Let’s unite — Muslims, First Nations peoples, unionists, climate justice advocates — to build a better Australia. One rooted in dignity, justice, and vision.

To Zia and those who share his fear: we understand. But fear is not a strategy.

Vote with your conscience. Organise with courage. Build something better.

No more false choices. No more crumbs. No more silence.