Hooverism as a Framework for Understanding the Historical and Unethical Nature of the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Other Surveillance Practices in the United States

Abstract

This conceptual paper presents Hooverism as a theoretical framework to examine the ideological logic, continuity, and evolution of biometric surveillance in the United States. It draws on the political and bureaucratic practices that were institutionalized during J. Edgar Hoover’s tenure as FBI Director of 48 years (1924–1972), spanning the administrations of eight U.S. presidents from Calvin Coolidge to Richard Nixon. Hooverism is defined by a constellation of logics, informational supremacy, loyalty enforcement, racialized control, and bureaucratic secrecy that continue to structure contemporary modes of governance. Rather than offering a purely historical account, this article synthesizes insights from emerging literature in surveillance studies and critical data theory to conceptualize Hooverism as a persistent ideological infrastructure that legitimizes preemptive domestic intelligence and embeds suspicion as a normalized practice within democratic institutions. Through a critical reading of historical precedents alongside modern developments in algorithmic governance, predictive policing, and data-driven social control, the paper traces the ideological thoughts connecting mid-20th-century intelligence practices to today’s public–private surveillance partnerships, immigration enforcement regimes, and AI-based risk assessment systems. In doing so, it positions Hooverism not as an archival curiosity but as a living paradigm, one that continues to shape and justify the defense and the expansion of opaque, machine learning data-driven surveillance programs under the guise of security and order. This paper does not provide definitive empirical conclusions. It acts as a catalyst for strong academic discussion and is intended to motivate future research efforts. By critically analyzing the idea of Hooverism, it thoroughly explores the ethical, political, and technological aspects of biometric surveillance in today’s digital world. It invites scholars and researchers to participate in this intellectually stimulating inquiry, fostering a deeper understanding of the implications and innovations that arise within this complex field. It argues that legislative reforms alone are inadequate to counteract the depth of Hooverist logic. It calls for a multifaceted strategy that embeds strong accountability in public–private data infrastructures, promotes community-centered oversight, implements ethical surveillance auditing, and demands algorithmic transparency based on democratic values. Articulating this conceptual framework, the paper represents an attempt to catalyze scholarly inquiry into how democratic societies might resist governance through suspicion and reclaim surveillance from the logics of fear and control to one of ethical engagement.