Borders are often portrayed in stark terms, perhaps as national-scale threats, or as sites of suffering, or conversely as hosts to socio-cultural symbiosis. Yet borders are many things all at once. In this paper, we use the comparative context of the US-Mexico border and the Mexico-Guatemala border to critique what we call the 'border as hegemony', a borderscape constructed through obstructions, punitive policing and reinforcing the limits of state control. Instead, we propose a model of the 'border as discord'. In our heuristic framework, diverse mobilities are embraced, interests of borderlanders are acknowledged and prioritized, and borders are interpreted not as a security threat but as a resource for change.