> The indigenous groups probably didn't even have anything like our modern concept of land "ownership"

I doubt they had deeds to land. But they did fight inter-tribal wars over which territory belonged to which tribe.

Humans have a very well developed notion of "mine" and "not mine". Saying indigenous peoples did not have this is an extraordinary claim, and would need strong evidence.

Well, I feel like the "traditional way of life" argument is okay for why they should get special treatment. But why should anyone get special treatment if they are going to just, essentially, treat it as way to siphon tax revenue from the larger society?

I have always disliked and told people I disliked land acknowledgements because they are designed to earn the social capital of giving the land back without ever having any intention of doing anything close to that.

The institution of land ownership is very important in farming societies, where land is what produces wealth and health.

Societies on the hunter/gatherer spectrum also value their hunting grounds, but in far less strict ways.

I'm pretty sure the indigenous peoples that lived by farming had well developed concepts of land ownership, but they were the minority when Europeans arrived.

Here in Australia they use the carefully crafted phrase: “the previous custodians of this land”.

As in… we are the custodians now.

funny because i feel that your comment plays into the exact same tropes about “indigenous ways of knowing” you critique