The native/indigenous view of relationship to land and cultivation of the land is far superior to the European capitalist concept of owning and dominating the land - really?
I live in a capitalist country. If I want meat - a food item often viewed as a luxury - I can visit one of the many supermarkets in my area. Some meats are pricey, such as lamb. But others are quite cheap and there are always deals - 30% knocked off the price, two for the price of one, etc. And vegetables are fairly cheap.
There are soup kitchens for those people who have no money. There they can eat for free.
Compare that to indigenous hunter-gatherers. The women find and gather fruits and vegetables. There's no guarantee that their haul will be adequate. The men hunt animals for food. Again, there's no guarantee that they won't come home empty handed. If there's a drought or outbreak of disease that wipes out their game, they'll starve or become malnourished. No supermarkets, no soup kitchens.
Now, I know that capitalism is sometimes (or maybe often) done irresponsibly and western-style farming can ruin the soil, cause livestock to suffer, etc. But our society is self-correcting. There are animal welfare groups and farming standards that press for livestock welfare. Environment groups and committees seek to improve the land that is farmed. Improvements are being made, wrinkles are ironed out.
You're not saying indigenous people's way of living is superior, are you?
In order to get some meat, would you try your hand at hunting or nip to the local supermarket ...