After reading various posts and having expanded my knowledge about it, I can finally express my partial opinion.
In the first place, the construction of walls is in sharp contrast with the very idea of globalization ...
How can one think of closing and circumscribing the life of a nation within walls if then, economically speaking, we are all "connected"?
How can we think of preventing the entry of foreigners if the global collectivity is based, at least theoretically, on the concept of cosmopolitanism?
If we base our ideas on inspiring culture and society but also on politics and economics, the concept of wall is a paradox.
It is also true that many times we need a wall to separate people, to protect us from invaders, for our personal space, to preserve our privacy, like the wall of a garden, a house or an operating room.
But the containing function has nothing to do with the "separatist" function.
You cannot hypothesize open spaces but you can conceive closed spaces as spaces that can be shared as in the case of the wall of your garden that protects your home but you can open it to those you want.
To conclude,I think there is not a precise answer but two points of view and I strongly believe that we must be CITIZENS OF THE WORLD, recognizing as the homeland the whole world and considering irrelevant the political, ethnic, cultural or religious distinctions between nations because all the human beings are equal and enjoy the same rights, regardless of the state they belong to.
And culture, music, sport are essential elements to guarantee the unity and interculturality between peoples because it must be remembered that TRADITION always rhymes with CONTAMINATION.
The main objective to be achieved is to spread "a culture of coexistence" with the aim of mitigating the rate of ethnocentrism present in our educational system.
This is my personal opinion, what do you think?