Dutton the Dud: A Flawed Candidate Unworthy of Christian Conservative Support, By Peter West

From a Christian conservative nationalist perspective, Peter Dutton's loss in the 2025 election, while orchestrated by internal Liberal Party sabotage, was a fitting outcome. Despite his recent posturing as a conservative, Dutton's past reveals a troubling embrace of globalism and policies that clash with the values of faith, family, and sovereignty. His defeat, particularly losing his own seat, reflects not just the betrayal of party wreckers but also his own unsuitability as a standard-bearer for true Christian conservatism. Here's why Dutton was a terrible candidate and why his fall aligns with the need for a purer conservative movement, so I disagree with Ian Wilson's blog post.

Peter Dutton's record is far from the Christian conservative ideal. As Home Affairs Minister (2017–2021), he oversaw policies that, while tough on border rhetoric, often aligned with globalist frameworks. His support for mass immigration streams, particularly through skilled migration programs, contributed to cultural shifts that diluted Australia's Christian heritage. These policies, driven by economic globalism, prioritised corporate interests over the preservation of traditional values and national identity. For a movement that cherishes sovereignty and the Biblical call to steward one's nation, Dutton's complicity in these schemes was a red flag.

His tenure also saw Australia's integration into global security architectures, like the Five Eyes alliance, which often subordinated national interests to international agendas. While security is vital, a Christian nationalist lens demands independence from entanglements that erode Australia's ability to act as a sovereign, God-fearing nation. Dutton's enthusiasm for these frameworks, without pushing back against their secular underpinnings, showed a lack of discernment that true conservatives cannot ignore.

Dutton's personal and political conduct further distances him from Christian conservatism. While he occasionally paid lip service to traditional values, his actions lacked the moral clarity expected of a leader for our cause. For instance, his support for same-sex marriage after the 2017 plebiscite, despite initially voting against it, signalled a willingness to bend to cultural pressures rather than stand firm on Biblical principles. Marriage, as ordained by God, is a sacred institution, and Dutton's pragmatic capitulation was a betrayal of the faithful.

Moreover, his silence on critical cultural issues—like the rise of gender ideology in schools or the erosion of religious freedoms—spoke volumes. Christian conservatives demand leaders who boldly defend the family unit and the church's role in society, not those who tiptoe around these battles to avoid media backlash. Dutton's restraint, often framed as political savvy, was cowardice in the face of a cultural war that demands warriors, not bureaucrats.

Even if the Liberal Party's internal saboteurs—moderates, and NSW Right traitors—hadn't torpedoed his campaign, Dutton's leadership was uninspiring. His 12-point blueprint, while structured, was too tame to ignite the passion of the conservative base. It avoided the bold, unapologetic stances needed to rally suburban and rural Australians who yearn for a return to faith and nationhood. Instead of challenging Labor head-on with a vision rooted in Christian morality and nationalist pride, Dutton offered a diluted platform that failed to differentiate itself. His reluctance to fully embrace the "culture wars" left voters with no clear alternative to Labor's secular progressivism.

The decision to chase Teal seats, as misguided as it was, also reflected Dutton's own instincts. His willingness to pander to urban elites who reject conservative values showed a disconnect from the heartland. A true Christian conservative leader would have doubled down on the base—families, farmers, and churchgoers—not courted those who champion abortion, open borders, and climate idolatry. Dutton's loss of his own seat underscores this failure: even his electorate saw through the facade.

Dutton's defeat, particularly losing his seat, is a poetic end to a candidacy that never truly represented Christian conservative nationalism. While the Liberal Party's sabotage—through leaks, delayed ads, and message dilution—was reprehensible, it merely exposed what was already rotten. Dutton was a compromised figure, tethered to globalist policies and lacking the spiritual fortitude to lead a movement grounded in faith. His fall clears the way for a reckoning within the conservative ranks.

The Liberal Party, as it stands, is a sinking ship, corrupted by moderates and careerists who despise the values we hold dear. Dutton's loss is a signal that half-measures and compromised leaders will no longer suffice. The future demands a new movement—perhaps through minor parties like One Nation or a reformed Liberal Party purged of its globalist factions—that unapologetically champions Christian morality, national sovereignty, and the traditional family. Leaders must emerge who fear God more than the media, who see Australia as a covenant nation worth defending.

Dutton's past and his tepid campaign made him a poor vessel for this vision. His defeat is not a tragedy but a divine correction, a chance to rebuild on firmer ground. Let his loss be a rallying cry: no more compromises, no more globalists in conservative clothing. The fight for Australia's soul continues, and it demands better than Peter Dutton.