One of the main demands of Indigenous Peoples worldwide is territorial rights. These rights serve as the material foundation for their ability to continue existing as a people, to perpetuate their traditions, and to uphold and expand their production systems. Native Americans have been marginalized, and the majority of societies worldwide have ignored their rights. Locations like the United States, where there are Native Americans, Canada, and the nations of Australia, where there are Aboriginal people, are examples of how indigenous people are marginalized in society. The debate makes the case that land should be given back to indigenous people to safeguard it since they are inherently environmental conservatives, and it is a part of their culture since they acknowledge the connection between humans and the environment.
The case for returning land to indigenous people stems from the fact that they are the world’s greatest conservationists. Compared to, say, national parks and forests, indigenous peoples and small groups conserve a considerably more significant portion of the planet (Jones, 2021). In his research, Jones (2021) says that Pangasananan is only one of many places where local groups or Indigenous peoples have practised conservation to keep the environment intact. Because they have a long-standing concept that spirits are watching over nature and its resources, Native Americans employ various conservation strategies, such as limiting access to sacred locations, creating wildlife sanctuaries, and scheduling hunting seasons during off-peak hours. The assumption that a large portion of the original ecosystem on Indigenous property is being preserved is supported by academic studies. According to one study, for instance, protected regions in Brazil, Australia, and Canada lacked the biodiversity that indigenous territory possessed. Additionally, studies have revealed that in some areas, Indigenous peoples’ ownership over their lands prevents deforestation by at least as much as official protections (Jones, 2021). Because they inherently protect natural resources and biodiversity, the native population’s forests are better cared for and have more preserved species than those on non-indigenous territories. Because it means more to them, land is safeguarded in this way.
For indigenous people, the land is more than just a resource or a source of fulfilment; as such, they will take excellent care to safeguard it because it is an integral part of their cultural identity. According to the U’wa & Reinsborough (2002) report, the native people, known as U’wa Traditionalists, aim to preserve the natural environment to acknowledge and cater to their cultural requirements. Native Americans hold that human sustainability and mother nature are closely related. The conflict of worldviews that characterizes the globalization period is embodied in the U’wa quest to protect their land in the cloud forest. According to Jones (2021), a significant portion of the land is owned or controlled by local communities or Indigenous peoples, which the consortium describes as groups whose customs and means of subsistence are closely entwined with the land. Native Americans must preserve the land because it represents more than just a piece of property; it is a family custom passed down through the ages to their descendants. Even though many Indigenous and local people have unique customs and traditions, they often have a holistic, human-inclusive understanding of nature infused with spiritual or cultural significance. This viewpoint, in part, serves as the foundation for Indigenous land management practices, which may entail safeguarding sacred water bodies or forests or establishing laws prohibiting the exploitation of particular species.
Proponents of taking land away from Native Americans contend that doing so will advance the nation’s economic growth and prosperity. According to this theory, the majority of native lands are underutilized. In this sense, land is owned by the federal government rather than a community. In this sense, a capitalist endeavour has led the government to acquire land and create the biggest economy on the planet. White supremacy has proven throughout history to have the ability to transform institutions and take precedence over law. The relocation of indigenous has resulted in increased economic prosperity and a rise in capitalist society. The primary driver behind the forced removal of indigenous people and the annexation of their territory is increased economic output. In any case, returning land to the indigenous people guarantees the preservation of the ecosystem, protects their rights, and promotes an appreciation of cultural obligation.
In conclusion, it is essential to consider giving back land to the indigenous people to conserve it and give them a feeling of identity. Native Americans have a rich history of resistance, faith, and customs. Native Americans arranged themselves into strong confederacies and tribal nations before the arrival of colonists. Genocide has been justified by the establishment of institutional control and statutory authority as a response by white people to the traditional and political might of Native Americans. Even now, there remains a white supremacist structure in place in the US.
References
Jones, B. (2021, June 11). Indigenous people are the world’s most prominent conservationists, but they rarely get credit for it. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/22518592/indigenous-people-conserve-nature-icca
U’wa & Reinsborough, P. (2002). The Money King Is Only an Illusion. U_wa_and_Reinsborough (2) (1).pdf
write