Historically, there is a wide variety of political, legal, and economic processes by which the commons became private resources. For the last two centuries, the development of capitalism features intertwined processes of material dispossession and the proliferation of an absolutist conception of private property. In the last 50 years, the debate on the best management of the commons has limited itself to a narrow defense of the virtues of privatization or the need for social capital and co-evolution. While the former seeks to avoid the “tragedy of the commons,” the latter is based on proposals as fertile as Ostrom’s approaches to the governance of common-pool resources (CPR), involving the participation of other actors in addition to the state or the private sector. In this chapter, we analyze how the rhetoric of the absolutist conception of private property limits our understanding of the plurality and complexity of allocating these CPR into private hands in the real world. Through an in-depth case study of Chile, we reveal how the rules of the game, embedded in a neoliberal setting, have promoted a new wave of dispossession of the commons by way of the exclusive and excluding conception of property. Our main goal is to refresh the discussion of the “good governance” of the commons. To that end, we pursue a critical debate based on an interdisciplinary approach towards reconfiguring the concept of property (public, private, or in common) that may always be in harmony with the limits imposed by Nature and subject to legal protection to preserve humankind as the ultimate goal.