Latin/Latino itself actually isn't inclusive since it is commonly used to refer to basically anyone from central/South America, even though many people there have no Latin heritage and may not even speak a Latin language(eg descendents of the Mayans)
Shouldn't matter, words are defined by their use (what we use them to refer to), not their etymology. And of course the Spanish or Portuguese aren't "latin" either (white Argentinians, who many are of Italian origin would be closer to being "latin". That said, modern Italians aren't latins either).
We won't be renaming "Latin America" either, so latin/latino is just that, inhabitant of latin america - or from a place "predominantly speaking a latin-derived language". Note that Latinx has the same exact root anyway - and iirc it was never about the concerns above, just a BS misunderstanding of gendered nouns in other languages (because latino being "male" somehow excluded others).
In any case, it should up to the populations to decide if they wanted another term not "white saviours" and a number of privileged activists in a totally different country.
And if the locals themselves wanted to correct a historical injustice, instead of playing with words, they can give rights to indigenous people, stop killing them and taking their land, or they could even move out of Latin America and back into Europe all together...
