The important part is the "complete ownership of those rights". In the Soviet Union, a community had no rights and little power by ways of representative government to defend themselves. It's little different in the case of Chile. Do the nuances of state/corporate ownership of resources mean anything when they are both large, far off organizations exploiting my land with little of my own say?
The problem is when you can externalize problems with impunity. Doesn't really matter what the basic system is. Generally you find that systems that strip individuals or disfavored groups from having any power at all do that a lot. Especially those where pushing back is dangerous.
