If race-based affirmative action is replaced with a leg-up in admissions to those who come from poverty, regardless of race, I seriously doubt anyone is going to be crying “socialism.” First, we already have a far more direct form of this kind of socialism: financial aid for those who can’t afford college. The “Alt-Right” doesn’t generally complain about that. Moreover, the Alt-Right is much closer to socialism than the conventional right, which is why, as Steve Bannon himself has observed, Trump and Sanders had much more in common than either did with Hillary Clinton (or the Obamas, Bushes, Rubios and Romneys of the world). It’s the usual neocons and neolibs who complain about “socialism.” But I doubt even the traditional (non-Alt-)right will complain all that much if the evil of race-based admissions is replaced with a system of opportunity-admissions for economically underprivileged folks. The only people who are going to complain are the Democratic Party operatives (Clinton, Obama and those kinds of people) because they need to pander to Blacks and Hispanics on the basis of race in order to get these people to vote for the kinds of regressive pro-corporate economic policies the mainstream Democratic Party (like the mainstream Republican Party) supports.

As for your claim that I’m ignoring your statement about our treaties with Native Americans, remember I only responded on the one point in which you wrote that I disagreed with. As for our treaties with Native Americans, I will freely admit ignorance here. I do know, however, that the U.S. has a longtime history of backing out of its commitments to other nations (most recently the nuclear treaty with Iran and, before that, the promise to Gorbachev that the U.S. would not allow NATO to expand further into the former Warsaw Pact region).