Whether or not they're "designed" to be good or evil, I think it's impossible to read these things and not assign value to them. It's impossible to see "whiteness" described as "a malignant, parasitic-like condition" and not consider it a condition that white people have (the author of the paper even says this). We could argue the semantics of this all day long, but it's so obvious to anybody arguing in good-faith that I'm not going to say any more than that.

As for the items that appeared on the poster, it would be perfectly legitimate to define some of them as aspects of western society. But then why not call it that? Why (extraordinarily heavily) imply any racial component? And again, why risk sending the message to black children that qualities like rational thinking and "work before play" aren't for them?

Finally, yes, I think the goal of discussing racial history, as well as improving conditions for people of colour, is to "bring everyone together". What exactly is the alternative? I could reel off a list of writers who seem to think the goal is to spread animosity and bitterness to all mankind. Does this sound productive to you? Do you think this helps anybody? Most of all black people?

Yes. The goal is to bring people together. I'm saddened that this is even a question.