in one of the countries and they're happy to attack that one. Maybe there'll be a little more in your country but you probably had the same risk anyway.

So when you see the open borders people here, and here's my statement that I think is just my opinion alone, I don't know anybody else who has this specific opinion, but my belief is that the people who talk about open borders literally don't mean it. In other words, if you put a camera on them and say do you believe in open borders, they say yes and here are all my arguments. But I believe if I took that same person off camera in private and I said look, I hear what you're saying, on a conceptual level it does make sense to remove friction, that's good for everything, but in a real world, in a practical world, tell me how this looks to you. What would keep 50 million people from just entering the United States and what would the United States look like if 50 million people came here and said give me some health care or give me some whatever. So my belief is that the people who are claiming open borders, let's say the intellectual class, I'm not talking about the people who are activist and working with immigrants, they just have a self-interest. So there are two kinds of open border people. There are the intellectuals and the economists and the philosophers. I believe that in private none of them would support open borders. They would only support it on an intellectual basis, not on a practical basis, because they wouldn't be able to describe how it could work in our specific case. Whereas the activists, not really. They don't really care about the greater good as much as they care about their activism and about their cause. And by the way there's nothing wrong with that. The whole point of activism is people are advocating for their group and we allow activism, we allow free speech. So I'm not saying there's anything bad about that. But it's not in the interest of the people who might be living here if those act