Yes, that is the design, because this brings the hypocrisy into stark relief. There's a high degree of overlap between whiteness scholars and scholars of critical discourse analysis (e.g. Robin DiAngelo is both). You can't, as an expert in the area, use terminology like "whiteness" while objecting to terms like "blacklist" without very much intending the insult.

We already have perfectly good terms for the conquest of the Americas by Europeans: invasion and colonization. It is part of a long tradition of ugly brutality of humanity, where the powerful usurp what the weaker have. Whether it's the Sinicization of China, the Tupi expansion into Argentina, the Yamanaya in Europe, the Bantus taking over sub-Saharan Africa from hunter-gatherers, this is not new and not white.

We should be ashamed at how recently this took place--the abuses were occurring at the same time as people were widely accepting a far more humane vision of society, and yet the abuses were being excused anyway. It's quite horrid, and we should do what we can to mitigate that legacy without causing yet more suffering and human hardship while trying to do so.

Part of that is not attacking groups by using demeaning language, and then denying it when challenged.

If we're in this together, let's be in it together, respectfully, and do better than history.

If we're not in this together, we'd better have a very serious reflection on exactly what that means, and make sure it's what we actually want.