cessful war against the federal civilnservice. Surrounded by surly and mischievousngovernment workers who resentednhis intrusion into their affairs,nthis Republican president looked for waysnto run his administration without them.nHe assigned responsibilities to such confidentialnadvisors as Kissinger and Haldeman;nat other times, as in slowing downnschool desegregation plans, Nixon appealedndirectly to the people to gainnleverage against the HEW. His resort tonthe Plumbers’ unit was at least initiallyndesigned to uncover the source of informationnleaks in the government whichnwere damaging to him and, to what henthen felt, was national security. Althoughnthese undercover operations would eventuallynbe directed against his personalnenemies, their origin, according to Haldeman,nlay in his justified perception ofna civil service run riot.nSupposedly the “get Nixon” forcesnprepared for their most savage assaultnwithin two months of Nixon’s landslidenvictory in November 1972. The occasionnwas a decision on the part of the triumphantnchief executive to overhaul hisnown administration. In Summer 1972,nthe President authorized Roy Ash, Directornof the Office of Management andnBudget, to construct a plan for streamliningnthe entire executive branch ofngovernment. Ash was to reduce the secretarialnposts to what seemed a manageablennumber and to contrive means fornridding the administration of hostile civilnservants. Within twenty-four hours ofnhis re-election, Nixon demanded thenresignations of a number of his key appointeesnand by January 1973, had approvedna comprehensive plan “for restoringnexecutive power to the President.”nHaldeman points to a rapid increasenstarting in January 1973 in the spacendevoted to the Watergate break-in in ThenWashington Post, New York Times,nNewsweek and on television news programs.nPublished reports and editorialncomments cited irate politicians and civilnservants who linked the Plumbers’ operationsnto Nixon’s ultimate goal of becomingna presidential dictator. I believen161nChronicles of Culturenthat Haldeman is right in examining thenfuror over Watergate in light of Nixon’snattempted shake-up of the Washingtonnbureaucracy. The accusation of creatingnan imperial presidency belonged to thatnlitany of outrage which emanated fromnthe press and professoriate throughoutnthe period of Nixon’s downfall. In fact,nthe news media had depicted Nixon asntyrannizing over courageous libera] civilnservants ever since his publicized disputenwith Robert Finch, his first and supposedlynmost progressive Secretary ofnHEW. And the adversary press receivednconsiderable assistance from its bureaucraticnallies when the IRS released informationnabout Nixon’s alleged tax evasionnin Spring, 1973.niTTaldeman repeatedly underscores thenties between the Washington CivilnService and the predominantly liberalnnews media and Congress. Because ofntheir intimate involvement in carryingnout what in recent years have been liberalnsocial policies, the Civil Service canngenerally count upon the support ofnprogressive journalists and news announcers.nAn equally cordial alliance can benshown to exist between federal bureaucratsnand the Congress. Haldeman makesnthe reasonable observation that “Thengreatest power centers in Washingtonnare the liaisons between CongressionalnCommittee staffs and the Federal bureaucraticndepartments they deal with.”nX he Congressional struggle againstnNixon involved more than the outragednpride and constitutional concerns of thenparticipants. What also probably upsetnmany anti-Nixon Congressmen was thenthreat of having their access to an entrenchedncivil service suddenly cut offnby a willful chief executive. Haldemannportrays Nixon and his White Housenaides as having walked into a den ofnenemies without the sword of legalitynto protect them. Although the Nixonnadministration has now been discreditednand removed, the den composed ofnnew class bureaucrats and their numerousnmyrmidons remains very muchnintact. nnIn the forthcoming issue of Chronicles of Culture:nThe Midyear Harvestn”We arc repeatedly asked lo explain what we mean by thenterm ‘Liberal Culture’—the one combination of wordsnperhaps used most often in these pages. The generalnimpression is that whatever it means, we do not like it. Thisnis correct. So before wc venture into subtle reasoning onnwhat we mean by what, something should be forcefully andnunequivocally stated: liberalism and the Liberal Culture are notnsynonyinous, not the same, and often, though not verynoften, at odds — “nfrom CommentnAlso:nOpinions & Views — Commendables — In FocusnWaste of Money — Liberal Culture — ScreennJournalism — The American ScenenPolemics & Exchangesnnn