When the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay Colony had Thanksgiving, it was thanking God for winning a genocidal war against the Indians. When the Pilgrims of Plymouth Colony had Thanksgiving, it was with the Indians. It's like the difference between moderate Muslims and extremists. The Pilgrims who landed on the shore and fasted with the Wampangoag (that's not a typo for "feast", they actually had a three-day *fast*) were peaceful white folks, and the Puritans were bloodthirsty extremists. I think that's an important distinction to make. The Pilgrims didn't kill Indians for Thanksgiving, it was the Puritans. But we should not be so iconoclastic that we conflate the Puritans and the Pilgrims.
We need to use it as an occasion to give reparations that Natives want (monetary, land, healing, power over their resources and destiny, centering of voices, truth-telling, etc, not one-off and on one day but as a process, and year round). And just as some cities have changed Columbus Day to Indigenous People's Day, Thanksgiving needs to recognize how New England today is the result of the systemic genocide of Native Americans. And Columbus was very much a Hitler, or worse, because Hitler didn't even rape children and help establish child prostitution rings. Jefferson, Franklin, they were total white supremacists who wanted America white (and certainly not "men of their time," because other white people disagreed with them). We need to let people know there are no sacred cows in American history.
Presidents have even confused the two groups) even in their day, lower-case "p" pilgrims was once used as a generic term for both Puritans and Pilgrims. *Though this doesn't negate that the word "pilgrim" may be triggering to people of color, a generic term used colloquially as interchangeable with the Puritans (two U.S.