I expect "let's abolish whiteness" is a much more nuanced position than anything like "being white makes you evil."

When people have their historic ethnicities erased in order to be inducted into the social force called being "white," one could make the subjective argument (based on one's own values) that this trade-off is disadvantageous for the individual and thus bad (or perhaps a mixed bag). No third party can make this judgment on your behalf, however.

The argument I would take to this conversation is that whiteness itself isn't inherently problematic (though the concept itself isn't clearly delineated, meaning it may lack construct validity), but attempts to position whiteness in contrast with everyone else are bad. In this sense, the application of whiteness as a zero-sum system (ie, privilege and disprivilege) could be seen as evil due to the resulting harms, but this is almost completely divorced from the individual level. I'd be sympathetic to arguments that the concept of "whiteness" encourages tribalism, but I wouldn't agree that this makes it inherently problematic (any group identifier can fall victim to this). Still, this is a far cry from whiteness being now-and-eternally bad.

On the structural scale, the effects of whiteness can be discussed as an aggregate, and we can criticize how systems function, but we'd necessarily be discussing interactions, not identities. Saying someone is evil for having been born into an oppressive majority would essentially be a category error--to illustrate this with a metaphor, when a machine malfunctions, not every part is equally to blame; if your car breaks down because your engine blows a gasket, you can't blame your brake lines. Yes, they're all parts of the system that makes up your car, but changing the muffler isn't going to make your car go again. On this structural level, "whiteness" exists in the same way that "car" exists--as a product of the inter-connectedness of a large number of smaller parts (people's beliefs, actions, laws, etc.)--and "evil" exists in the same way that vehicular homicide exists (as a product of how the entire system is used). You aren't "that unique evil" because you're a part of the car (with respect to categories, you're a subordinate component to the superordinate "structural whiteness"). In terms of moral culpability, you're only responsible for evil to the extent that you have the ability to affect its outcome.

I know that may not be the exact same argument you're talking about, but I wanted to get my thoughts down on some of the issues you've touched on in this thread.

The problem is that [my ethnicity is] built on evil, read Andrea "white person pretending to be Native American" Smith's 3 pillars thing or look at the influence it got. It's not like redeeming it will happen EVER.

She seems to disagree with your interpretation of her essay, in that same essay:

It is important to note that these pillars of white supremacy are best understood as logics rather than categories signifying specific groups of people.

Thus these three pillars do not reflect components of whiteness or people with white skin but rather as something akin to memes which can be participated in (note: including by people of color). Whiteness in America is built on a history of crimes stemming from these pillars, but you are not obligated to participate in them, and you have the ability to challenge them. A practice of "whiteness" which subverts these pillars is a moral good.