In his inspirational article titled 'Bringing politics into the nursery', Peter Moss argues for early childhood institutions to "become" places of 'democratic political practice'. In this article, the authors add to Moss's call and argue that these institutions are sites of 'mundane political practice', containing various attitudinal orientations and ideologies, and including many kinds of purposive activities. Recognizing different dimensions of political life in institutional spaces where children lead their lives requires a differentiation between two types of politics: first, official politics and policies that aim to institute certain ideals in early childhood education and care and, second, everyday politics unfolding in communities that involve people as political subjects from birth until death. When the latter is discussed in early childhood research, if at all, it is rarely identified in political terms, which the authors consider problematic. The lacking recognition of mundane politics denies important aspects of children's agency, which is prejudicial in itself. Moreover, such ignorance may lead to unintended consequences in democratization processes, like the one suggested by Moss. Imposing political ideals without recognizing children's existing political agencies carries a risk of interfering with their political lives so that some children may feel misrecognized or find their capacities to act hindered or their activities misunderstood. In order to avoid such outcomes, this article is an argument for research and pedagogies that acknowledge and scaffold children's political agencies at large.