I don't think "back at ya" is the goal here. There are many practical and good reasons to have fingerprints of people entering/trying to enter your country. Most are the same reasons that you have to give fingerprints in domestic situations.
This new rule applies to ALL travelers coming into the Schengen area, not just Americans.
Case in point: South Korea. It has the total fingerprint DB of every adult citizen. Has been so for decades. Doesn't really affect people's freedom except in the abstract sense of "I don't like it when the government knows too much about me" way. Didn't even stop citizens from organizing mass protests when our president was stupid enough to declare martial law last year.
There are usual suspects that pose much bigger threats to democracy: things like income inequality, failing education, social network doing its things, media colluding with mega corporations, the usual stuff. Fingerprints may make a nice Hollywood SF thriller but that's about it.
The way I see it, a government not having my fingerprints creates one more barrier to possible tyrannical actions like this and is thus a good thing.
(I mean, Ed Hasbrouck has been campaigning against travel surveillance and heightened use of ID for many years, so we have, like, one person!)
One problem is that when governments get together to talk about data and travel, they mostly end up negotiating ways to collect and exchange more data about travelers!
