Is Amoralism an Ideology?
Amoralism can be (or even "is") an ideology … depending (as always) on how the terms are being used. If “ideology” has the innocuous meaning of something that is merely a point of view or a subjective doctrine, then, to be a consistent amoralist (who is amoralistic even about amoralism), then I must of course grant that amoralism is an ideology.
However, if “ideology” has the added connotation of a point of view that is held with absolutist conviction, then I can say only that amoralism can be an ideology, but is not one necessarily. This is equivalent to saying that amoralism can become a moralism.
Likewise, moralism may itself be an amoralism. The deciding factor is the attitude of the a/moralist. If an amoralist wields his amoralism in an absolutist fashion, then he is really a moralist as far as I am concerned. (And that would make his amoralism an "ideology.") Similarly, if a moralist wields her moralism in a relativist and subjectivist way, then she may be a de facto amoralist. (And hence her moralism would not be an ideology in the full-blown sense.)
The reason I prefer amoralism to moralism is simply that I think, as a matter of empirical conjecture, an amoralist is more likely to be amoralist than a moralist (i.e., less likely to be an ideologue).