 kind of build off of, you know, the way that you see historical analysis playing out not only in just having a better understanding of what really happened, but in terms of perhaps some of these culture war divides that we have going on in the country right now. Yeah, so there's a lot of good stuff to discuss there. The Liberty versus Power theory, or what I call a theory as I said, it's not, you know, I think Rothbard, but something that I try to argue in my book, as Rothbard did, is that this was actually something that not only older historians spoke about, most famously Lord Acton, you could say, but also contemporaries. So Bernard Bellin, who was the dissertation advisor of Gordon Wood, another famous American historian, both of them wrote on this and both of them discussed that, you know, Americans back in the day, they really did see things through this lens of liberty and power, right? They viewed liberty as the source of all sorts of inspiration and growth and flourishing. Well, power was this cancerous tumor. It was literally encroaching on everything that was corrupting. And that's why this has been, you see in depicting a central bank as this massive hydra of all sorts of tentacles, right? As the Jacksonians did, because they still, they too viewed things in terms of this Liberty versus Power framework. It's important to note. And this is something I try and do in my book will show that, yeah, this theme, this is people actually not only did hold this perspective, but it actually is a good explanation of why things proceeded or how things proceeded in the way they did. Because historians frequently try to look back on the past and sort of take maybe a current issue in the present. And so, well, it actually has this long and storied history. So, you know, obviously a libertarian such as myself is going to look back at America's libertarian tradition. Someone who such as Arthur Schlesinger, who is that historian you were mentioning, who's trying to argue that back in the days of FDR, the New Deal. Well, FDR is really in many ways, he can be his heritage, you know, that this interventionist Democrat perspective fighting for the common man against the entrenched interest, the aristocracy. Well, Andrew Jackson is similar to FDR, right? And so that took Joseph Dorfman to say, well, no, Andrew Jackson, when he was fighting these large businesses or these entrenched interests, it wasn't because of capitalism, it was because they had various government privileges, right? And you see this with Howard Zinn and other historians nowadays. So, because critical race theory is very important and the big 1619 project and everything. So, you're going to look back into history and you're going to see, well, there were people who were arguing our perspective that, you know, race relations was this big issue and all sorts of other stuff. And that's why America history is all doom, gloom and boom, so to speak. And it's important to, obviously, you know, respectfully engage the literature, at least as respectfully as we can and try and show that, well, that's incorrect. There's actually, you know, this is a much more convincing explanation of what happened because there are parallels with the modern-day cultural wars, etc., because people are always trying to look back into history and sort of in order to support their own viewpoint. So, we do see, you know, these themes, it's not trying to look back into, oh, you know, trying to paint Andrew Jackson as a proto FDR guy. Now it's, let's try and paint Andrew Jackson as some sort of genocidal maniac or whatever, which is not true. That's just a distortion of the facts. And it's important to really combat these and to produce good history because history is how history absolutely influences our perspective on the present day.