I don't believe in open borders, I don't think that would work. I think economically they're a disaster. Therefore there's nothing wrong with strong borders.
There is a common perception that there are two alternative libertarian positions on immigration: government-controlled borders and open borders. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is only one libertarian position on immigration, and that position is open immigration or open borders.
The No. 1 question I get is, "Do you believe in an open-borders policy?" I'm like, wait a second: What does that really mean? When you say open-borders policy, do you mean that - this is like the US-Mexico border? We put up a sign that says "Keep Out," then 10 yards in we say, "Job Wanted." Is that what people mean by open borders? So that usually shuts people up. But that's the truth.
Amnesty is a disaster, we need strong borders. We have no country if we have no border. In New Hampshire, the biggest complaint is heroin, pouring across the southern border. We have to have strong borders, keep the drugs out. I want a wall. I want to get the drug lords out; then we can at a later date make a determination as to the rest.
America would have a disaster on trade, and America will have a disaster with open borders.
Some people are so surprised that we're having strong borders. Well, that's what I have been talking about for a year and a half, strong borders.
While nations protect their physical borders, tech platforms leave digital borders wide open.
One of the greatest things that could really happen to Africa is for us to get rid of the borders and for the leadership not to think that the countries belong to them... We didn't create the borders to start with.
This is a big world. Billions - rapidly increasing billions - of people live outside our borders. Obviously, a great number of them, being much poorer than they think most of us are, look enviously over those borders and would like, if they could, to come here.
The Libertarian position on immigration is to have, not open borders with no restrictions, but to have controlled borders that allow hard-working people to come into America to help raise their standard of living and improve the American economy.
When they come to Europe, they are confronted by still closed borders. Thus, the concept of open borders is a very selective concept, one that is not taken seriously at all in the experience of non-Europeans.
In an ideal world, you could reunite the Pakistan-occupied part of Kashmir with the Indian-occupied part and restore the old borders. You could have both India and Pakistan agreeing to guarantee those borders, demilitarise the area, and to invest in it economically. In a sane world that would happen, but we don't live in a sane world.
I believe in strong borders, including keeping out Islamic terrorists. If people think that's inherently racist, fine - but I'm an American nationalist, not a white nationalist.
Few states, they have the international borders, state borders; in India, there is so much diversity in system. Unity in diversity is our system, so therefore, you cannot take for granted, whatever you do.
If you challenge the constitution and if you challenge the borders of Iraq and the borders of the region, this is a public invitation to the countries in the region to violate Iraqi borders as well, which is a very dangerous escalation.
I'm on record saying nothing about immigration until we secure the borders. The borders are not secure.
The more borders we have, the more quarrels, the more wars. That's one way to think about borders - they're trouble.