found in Progressivism an approach that reflected his own
obsession with organization and social control. What’s more, here
was a way for Hoover, a deskbound functionary, to cast himself as
a dashing figure—a crusader for the modern scientific age. The fact
that he didn’t fire a gun only burnished his image. Reporters noted
that the “days of ‘old sleuth’ are over” and that Hoover had
“scrapped the old ‘gum shoe, dark lantern and false moustache’
traditions of the Bureau of Investigation and substituted business
methods of procedure.” One article said, “He plays golf. Whoever
could picture Old Sleuth doing that?”
Yet an ugliness often lurked beneath the reformist zeal of
Progressivism. Many Progressives—who tended to be middle-class
white Protestants—held deep prejudices against immigrants and
blacks and were so convinced of their own virtuous authority that
they disdained democratic procedures. This part of Progressivism
mirrored Hoover’s darkest impulses.
As Hoover radically streamlined the bureau, eliminating
overlapping divisions and centralizing authority, White, like other
special agents in charge, was given greater command over his men
in the field, but he also became more accountable to Hoover for
anything the agents did, good or bad. White had to constantly fill
out Efficiency Rating sheets, grading agents, on a scale of 0 to 100,
in such categories as “knowledge,” “judgment,” “personal
appearance,” “paper work,” and “loyalty.” The average score
became an agent’s overall grade. After White told Hoover that he
had occasionally given an agent a 100 rating, Hoover responded
sharply, writing, “I regret that I am unable to bring myself to
believe that any agent in the jurisdiction of the Bureau is entitled
to a perfect or 100% rating.”
Hoover, who believed that his men should conquer their
deficiencies the way he had conquered his childhood stutter,