The illusionist point of view is false by definition, although their definition of "illusion" or "exist" sounds like it might not be how I'd define those words.
Qualia does not exist
Subjective experience does not exist
Consciousness does not exist
There's nothing wrong with acting unethically or immoral because nobody actually experiences any harm because nobody experiences anything
Does anyone really think that's true?
The first three self-constrain impulses to the contrary on morality behaviors.
I'm not sure what you mean that it doesn't exist in a classical sense. That qualia, subjective experience and consciousness are not concrete entities? That something doesn't exist if its an emergent property or that something doesn't exist if its a process?