Why Trump's lack of ideology is a good thing

In the 1980s, a hardcore punk band from New York City known as Agnostic Front wrote a song called "Public Assistance." The song lambasted abusive welfare recipients, the tragedy of the permanent underclass and the system that has encouraged oppressive hand-outs instead of constructive hand-ups. The band was branded racist for years, in large part because of the sensibility and message embodied by this song. This demonization was all very comical given that the band's lead singer, Roger Miret, is, as is pronounced via a tattoo on his neck, 100 percent Latino.

The truth is that Agnostic Front was apolitical and not at all ideological. They were (and still are) a band of tough, blue-collar urban men with muscular, common-sense opinions. Agnostic Front didn't reference some internal ideological checklist to pre-filter their raw, authentic opinions on the issue of welfare abuse before writing "Public Assistance." They didn't worry about how many might twist their intent or misunderstand their frustration. They, instead, spoke honestly and truthfully about what they saw as an immoral system that infringed upon their lives.

It is this sensibility that today fuels those who are viscerally responding to Donald Trump. He calls himself the blue-collar billionaire who says it like it is for a reason. He speaks without nuance and academic flair for a reason. Donald Trump is not driven by ideological underpinnings. He knows who he is trying to reach. He knows how they feel. He knows his audience isn't fundamentally ideological either – although now many of the ideologically rooted are begrudgingly endorsing him or planning to pull the lever for him.

The true and pure Trumpsters, much like hardcore punk legends Agnostic Front, see themselves as operating within a strain of muscular, authentic, common sense.

It is this sensibility that is now being tagged as the "alt-right" – and being craftily grafted into the realm of fringe white supremacism and racism by Hillary Clinton and pretentious liberals.

TRENDING: The Capitol attack: Another deceitful, leftist narrative

Hardcore punk legends Agnostic Front aren't racist and neither is Mr. Trump.

In the tragic moral choice that is the dichotomy between the extreme danger of Donald Trump and the certain death option of Hillary Clinton, I deliberately choose extreme danger. And in this conscious choice of voting for extreme danger, I know that the task ahead, should Trump become our president, will be to unequivocally be forever on guard against the extreme danger he ostensibly poses.

The extreme danger most potently emanates from his lack of ideological underpinnings. Trump's positions are historically colored by a loosely principled hodgepodge of flexible policy that manifest fluidly depending on the zeitgeist of the moment and the surrounding opportunities. One must only juxtapose his past coziness with the Clintons and his interludes of flirtation with Jesse Ventura and his upstart third-party venture next to his current iteration as a conservative Republican icon to understand the fluidity I am describing.

The paradoxical reality of this extreme danger is that it is Trump's lack of ideological undergirding that also gives me comfort – because I don't believe he is susceptible to committing himself fully to any strident ideology, which the alt-right, as it is being described, most certainly appears to be.

I understand the trepidations some commentators have regarding Trump's personality and its apparent propensity towards authoritarianism. I sympathize with the urge to make the leap from that observation toward a fear of outright facism manifesting in a Trump administration.

I, however, can not make that leap.

I see the legitimate concern in Stephen Bannon being his campaign's CEO, particularly given his strange admission of being a Leninist and his questionable philosophical associations.

I see the earnest concern in Trump's apparent stickiness with people known for playing heavy footsie with Russia – like ex-campaign manager Paul Manafort.

I also listen to the spooky endorsements of Trump by Putin's apparent consigliere, Alexander Doogin, and get the chills, especially given Doogin's strange eschatological beliefs.

None of this is heartening. All of this is worthy of ongoing scrutiny and inspection. But it needs to be balanced with the other flavors of council Trump has strategically surrounded himself with. Key evangelicals. Mr. Newt. Rudy. Ben Carson. Now Ailes.

In the end, this alt-right attachment, although it represents a real concerning sub-sect of the progressive nationalistic right, will not stick to Trump, and does not represent Trump.

Trump is simply not ideological, outside of the narcissistic ideology of his own self-focused Trumpism – which very much has cloaked him with a certain amount of ongoing immunity to the penetrative opinions of others.

Because while there lies within his roster of advisers many that appear to counterbalance those who carry with them alt-right concerns, the truth is, we are still talking about Trump – a man who is, at his core, a self-propelled narcissist who has proven that his ability to truly be guided by the counsel of others is limited, short-lived and reluctant.

For my money, I reckon there's no chance we see Mr. Trump clothing himself in some unbridled alt-right ideology or policy trajectory any time soon.

Andrew Thorp King's book "BLAZE: Operation Persian Trinity" is a geo-political spy thriller that exposes the dangers of Islamic eschatology and the belief in the Twelfth Imam. Out now on World Ahead Press.