 the Hawaii sovereignty movement, that movement was at its most kind of violent in the 1970s. There were some shootings, but just individual shootings, you know, not widespread violence. There is no kind of guerrilla army out there to fight for the secessionist movement in these places. So actually, I think in some ways we're at a lower point than we were in the 1970s in terms of independence or insurrections or secessionist movements. Well, we're not in a good place right now. I mean, I think that people are unhappy with the federal government. And you know, the sense of why don't you just leave us alone to do our thing is there. And you mentioned twice in this discussion a few minutes ago that in the case of the Article of the Federation, it was, quote, falling apart. And in the case of the run up to civil war, it was falling apart. And I suppose somebody could at least entertain the thought that maybe in a funny way, it's falling apart now. I mean, it's not at the same level. No. I would say it's not even close, honestly. But yeah, there's definitely more strain within our union. And there are more, you know, there's more interest on the part of states in asserting their rights and even maybe ignoring federal laws that they don't like. The federal government, on the other hand, seems, you know, well, depends upon who's in power. This current, this current administration wants to impose things on the states. Yeah, it's so interesting. But at the same time, this administration is into the notion of states' rights. It wants to let the states have their way in many issues, except in certain other issues, it doesn't want to have the states. No, not really. I mean, they might say they're for states' rights, but they're really not. Let's talk about abortion. They want to give the states the right to, because at the state level, there's a lot of anti-abortion forces. Sure, sure, sure. So they say, well, let the states do what they want. Sure, there's some practical politics involved here, but let's take the marijuana movement. Just the other way. Right, so you have states who are passing these laws and now this administration says, well, we don't like these laws, and we're going to enforce federal law. And it's like, okay, how does that work? When a state has passed legalization, federal law says it's still a crime. How does that work? Which one do you follow? So there's some tensions in the system. You know, I get out of this. We're not done with this issue of states versus federal, the whole federal issue. And it may be different than it was, but it's still around. And maybe the whole idea of creating the call to checks and balances of having states versus the federal government ultimately perforce had to lead to this kind of tension. I think so. I think it's the federal system, which I think Madison recognized, that the federal system had these tensions built into it. But it was better than having a hegemonic center where, you know, a president for life, actually one of the federalist papers, the paper written by, I can't remember the name of it, but it's the number of it, but it's written by Alexander Hamilton. He argues in that for president for life. Wow, that's chilling. That's chilling. Yeah, so Hamilton's going, you know, more power to the center and Madison's going, no, no, we have this federal system. We've got a constitutional amendment, which shares power between the states and the federal government. So you have kind of this kind of shared sovereignty. And Madison says, overall, I think this is a fine government, a much better government than a hegemonic, European style, monarchy. So interesting this debate was taking place for so long. You know, when I get home tonight, I'm going to look up the movie Lincoln, the Spielberg movie. I'm going to watch that. Oh, yeah, yeah. You know, you're really excited about it. But big question. It's a great movie. It is a great movie. It's right down on the floor of the Senate and fabulous. But when, you know, when we come back, we got to the point where we were looking into Lincoln's internal strategy, figuring out how he could turn the ship of state in his direction, his interpretation of constitution. What are you going to talk about after that in Secession? Can you give us a praise? Well, sure. So after Secession is the war. And after April, 1861, both sides, they put together armies. They're going to fight. Now, the one thing is that both sides also assume that the fight will be short. The union looks at the Confederacy and goes, come on. We've got a national army up here. And we, you know, do we have to really? This is not serious. We'll go out and we'll whip those Johnny Rebs. And that'll be that. So let me make a guess. By 1864 or so, war was still going on. There were hundreds of thousands of casualties. That's true. Yeah, terrible. The mothers and the fathers were writing to Lincoln, saying, stop already. It's really getting tiresome. And the people around Lincoln, who he had convinced to follow him on his interpretation of constitution and the importance of slavery and federal oversight, are fighting with him now. They probably resurrect the old arguments and say, Lincoln, you know, you were wrong. Let's, let's read. Am I right?