Correct, the particulars are around private vs communal property. It is possible for a group of people to draw up a contract to collectively own a patch of land and limit access voluntarily. In such cases it would be trespassing to enter their property uninvited or against their will.
However, I don't agree that a Nation-State can decide for 3 million people via a majority vote not to let people cross borders. Individuals have property rights, groups can voluntarily own property, but a government shouldn't get to collectively own a territory and decide for everyone who lives within it's boundaries who it is going to let in and who it isn't.
So for me, national borders comes down to a question of should governments have collective ownership of a territory or not. My answer obviously is no. This leaves no borders except the border around every individual's rights to life, liberty, and property, including groups of individuals who want to draw up an actual physical contract to collectively own property such as patches of land.
Thanks for the reply, and share and resteem this post if you can!
Interesting times. This IS a MASS AWAKENING.