I think the first question assumes the position that they don’t have a better understanding, which is problematic because it’s an untested assumption.
This is just one case, but when I read Temalpakh: Cahuilla Indian Knowledge and Usage of Plants, an ethnobotany book for my area written by an anthroplogist and a native Californian, the authors spent a great deal of time describing how plant names were related to one another in the native language. They remarked how there were some similarities to the binomial naming system.
Therefore, indigenous people aren’t just randomly naming things and maybe some of these existing relationships might better inform naming practices.
With Anophthalmus hitleri and many of the comments in topic: If you could rename an existing species, it’s hard to argue that the way things are done now is best and that having more diverse input is bad.
Moreover, why can’t an indigenous person be a taxonomist?