I know many of us on the other side of the Atlantic are bewildered at how the campaign to leave the EU can be so dominated by the right.

The left, it seems, has gotten little out of the European Union. While the political cooperation aspect of it may have helped in the 1970s when social democracy was strong, the rise of neoliberalism in the 80s and 90s installed a group of oligarchs who have controlled the economic policies of European "countries" without their democratic approval. Countries with budgetary crises have gone through hell at the hands of the EU.

On the other hand, enhanced political cooperation had gone a significant way in the past to help advance some of the social goals of the left. Countries can be pressured to adhere to environmental and labour standards and human rights - and this, I believe - helped European countries at times to be held as models for progressive and open societies. Progressives would have a platform where others would feel obliged to listen, rather than choose to ignore the good things that they accomplish simply because they come from within different borders. Many left-leaning academics - and I don't mean guys who are actually centrist like Paul Krugman, like the environment of the EU despite opposing the neoliberalism it has come to be used for.

Now, let's talk specifically about Britain and the context of the EU in general. It's clear that the mainstream political parties have gotten out of touch with the voters. The center-right has gone full austere-corrupt-neoliberal, or wastes time bickering about irrelevant social issues. The center, as expected, is the progressive wing of the oligarchy, though they do everything they can to convince you that they are simply "independent" and "bipartisan". The center-left either blindly insists on the third way, which has become toxic since the recession or spends most of their time talking about feminism and gay rights to conceal the fact that they are divided. all of these guys support the EU.

Let's be clear though - not all of those mainstream forces who supported the campaign to remain is some pro-establishment oligarch or out-of-touch politician. There are many staunch center-left progressives like Jeremy Corbyn, as well as many smaller progressive political parties like the Green parties who support the EU for reasons such as open borders and political cooperation.

I have been following this somewhat and the stats and yes - the Labour vote, the young vote, and London voting heavily to remain - are correct. Unlike in Spain and Greece, where dislike of the EU is centered around views on austerity as well, in England it is viewed more in the context of openness and internationalism. I can assure you that these guys are not exactly third way centrists - they voted overwhelmingly for Corbyn last year- a self-described socialist - as their leader, even after Tony Blair came and predicted disaster should he be elected. In 2000, they successfully backed radical-left Labour party member Ken Livingstone in a three-way race after Blair blocked him from running on their ticket because he thought he was too far left. In 2004, they nominated him officially on the Labour ticket and won. Conservatives, by the way, tended to vote to leave - not to stay - indeed, the rural, older folk did not agree with Cameron.

Though it is true that immigration and the refugee crisis wasn't the only issue that determined the result, the mainstream media kept it at the top of the list, and I can guarantee you that in the current political situation, it is an issue that drives people to the polls. Though some may be happy that the strings that tied European countries to the Belgian elites may be coming loose, I struggle to see how this, at least in the short term, can be viewed as a victory for progressives and an opportunity for the left. EU-budgetary crises did help the radical left through, mostly, a weakening of the center-left, though their gains have only been particularly large in the countries that have faced these issues. Jeremy Corbyn is not popular, the UK media having succeeded in their hatchet job. His figures among young people are alright, but older Britons hate him.

Meanwhile, what has been consistent is the dramatic rise of the radical right - laser-focused on the issue of immigration - in various nations in Europe such as France, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Hungary. While some may be hoping for a broader shift to the left, and hoping for parties such as the UK Green Party, the Swedish Left Party, and the Dutch Socialist Party to soar in popularity, many in Europe, especially the ballooning older population, will resist moving heavily leftward unless they feel they have no choice. They may find what the radical right is proposing to be attractive - to achieve what neoconservativism was really promising in the 80s - lower taxes and smaller government without the cultural effects that globalization brings.

The main reason I'm not as afraid of Trump and am willing to joke about him becoming President is that I seriously don't see him being able to accomplish many of his more radical platform objectives. I doubt that most in even the Tea Party-led GOP could bring themselves to sign a Muslim ban even if they privately support it. If he tries to go after abortion rights - which I very much doubt he will considering his past record - there could be unprecedented opposition. Moreover, the idea of a U.S. President Donald Trump is, to much of the world, so ludicrous that he could easily gain a reputation as a sort of Bush on steroids. The global elites would likely try to use him as a scapegoat by repeatedly calling him a racist, but the political scrutiny that the U.S. would come under could help people unite on the left.

The radical right in Europe on the other hand, is different. They are organized in multiple different parties in various countries in Europe. They aren't simply reactionaries who came up in the refugee crisis or even after 9/11 - some of them have roots in the leftover white supremacists and paleoconservatives of the 80s and 90s, in Neo-nazism, and, in central Europe, some trace back to actual Nazis. They're not centered around a rich guy from outside politics who's had liberal views all his life; they've been towing the anti-immigrant, anti-minority, anti-Islam line for at least well over decade. They will try to implement policies such as banning mosques, ending naturalized citizenship and bringing back the death penalty. Oh yeah, and they love bombing.

Political parties in Europe tend not to be big tents - they can stack the parties with yes-men who will pass their agenda. What do we do if people we know are targeted? If the Middle-East retaliates? Can we not find, diplomatic, liberal, solutions, as the left would usually prefer?

I do not intend to fearmonger here. I am, however, very concerned about what will happen if wealthy, powerful countries opt to be governed by radical right-wingers on a large scale. Given the current political conditions, the path forward for the left is a difficult one. Of course I wanted the powerful elites to come crashing down, and soon too, but at a time where it could only benefit racists? I'm not so sure.