Three wolves and six goats are discussing what to have for dinner. One courageous goat makes an impassioned case: “We should put it to a vote!” The other goats fear for his life, but surprisingly, the wolves acquiesce. But when everyone is preparing to vote, the wolves take three of the goats aside. “Vote with us to make the other three goats dinner,” they threaten. “Otherwise, vote or no vote, we’ll eat you.” The other three goats are shocked by the outcome of the election: a majority, including their comrades, has voted for them to be killed and eaten. They protest in outrage and terror, but the goat who first suggested the vote rebukes them: “Just be thankful this is a democracy! At least we got to have a say!”
-Crimethinc
I deleted the last answer because it was too unfocused.
Tragedy of the commons assumes that we don't organize. With democratic confederalism, there is a focus on organizing, to come to agreements about how to properly take care of the land and the people. By doing so, we prevent harms from happening.
It doesn't assume that. It's merely describing a phenomenon where it's in everyone's individual interest (or in every small community's individual interest) to behave in a way that maximizes their benefit, but when everyone behaves that way it damages a common asset and causes collective harm .
Simply organizing doesn't solve any of it.
Check out the book "Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action". The author won a nobel price for her work.