<p>In this paper, I argue that the most recent moderate republican conception of freedom is not sufficiently plausible in all relevant cases. The most recent moderate republican view does not capture the distinctive character of republican freedom, or freedom of the person, because it focuses exclusively on the type-difference of a supposedly powerful agent, not on the type-difference of those affected by that agent, such as civic-type or non-civic-type. This problem of focusing exclusively on the specific agent-type-difference becomes apparent when considering the possible worlds in which, according to the most recent moderate republican view, the subjects of interference lack freedom as non-domination due to the absence of effective institutional arrangements. In this paper, I show that this ultimately undermines the most recent moderate republican view even in possible worlds where individuals appear to enjoy freedom as non-domination due to the presence of effective institutional structures.</p>