Hans Hoppe has argued that free immigration isn’t a liberal/libertarian policy so we shouldn’t hold it up as a goal to be reached. I believe Tom agrees with this point of view or at least he did back in the early 00’s after Hoppe’s book came out. Rothbard changed his mind from the standard libertarian open borders to the Hoppe view as well after the Berlin Wall fell. Here is the issue of the Journal of Libertarian studies where different views were presented:
Personally I have come to the conclusion which Hoppe holds and which most libertarians reject. Economically and socially I think it is problematic as well with open borders.
I’m from Denmark and the problems with immigrants from the third world have been huge. Mind you I’m a son of immigrants from a third world country but I can still recognize the flaws with this policy. Thankfully Denmark has more sense then Sweden which is completely under the politically correct spell and refuse to talk about this which is why the party you referenced the Sweden Democrats have gotten popular despite the right wing government refusing to allow them in their coalition and basically every part of the establishment refusing to have anything to do with them. In Denmark we have a similar party who managed to become mainstream and now that the leftists have come to power they don’t dare reverse the restrictionists policies that our anti-immigration party put in place while in government.
Europe is much more threatened than America because while latinos have been problematic it is not a question of a clash of differen’t civilizations in the stark way it is in Europe. Muslim immigration into a Christian society(even if it is post-christian) has been very troublesome and this will only get worse when you have a welfare state and multiculturalism as the standard policy teaching people that any preference for the historic majority of Danes is racist and no culture should be superior.