Counterfactual Governance Litmus Test
Judge competing sides by simulating each side in full control
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 90%
The counterfactual governance test asks what society would look like if each competing side suddenly received complete governing power. Instead of deciding from branding, sympathy, or a single incident, the evaluator simulates each side controlling lawmaking, taxation, the military, and public institutions. The comparison then focuses on observable consequences: courts, research, education, civil rights, religious freedom, women's rights, minority protections, and treatment of dissent. Applying identical authority to both sides creates a consistent standard and makes underlying values easier to see. The test is a directional decision aid, not proof about a specific event. Its quality depends on credible evidence about each side's doctrines and past behavior, plus honest acknowledgment of uncertainty.
Origin
Scott Galloway presents this as a litmus test for choosing between sides in a complicated wartime situation during Habits & Hustle episode 302.
Core principles
- 01Evaluate power by the institutions it would create
- 02Compare both sides under the same hypothetical conditions
- 03Concrete rights and rules reveal more than slogans
- 04Extreme authority exposes a group's governing values
How to run it
- 1
Define the choice
Name the two sides being compared and the exact decision the comparison must inform.
Pro tip Separate choosing a side's governing model from endorsing every action it takes.
- 2
Equalize authority
Imagine each side, one at a time, receiving the same complete control over government and coercive power.
Watch out Do not grant one side constraints that the other side lacks in the simulation.
- 3
Inspect institutions
Predict what happens to courts, research, education, taxation, and other public institutions under each scenario.
Pro tip Use documented conduct and doctrine rather than speculation alone.
- 4
Inspect rights
Compare how each scenario treats women, minorities, religious groups, dissenters, and other vulnerable people.
Pro tip Write the expected protections and restrictions side by side.
- 5
Choose provisionally
Prefer the scenario whose institutions and rights better match the standards you want preserved, while recording uncertainty.
Pro tip Revisit the judgment when new evidence changes the counterfactual.
Watch out This test does not establish who caused a particular incident.
In the wild
Galloway imagines Israel controlling American government and institutions, then imagines Hamas holding the same powers. He compares the expected effects on jury trials, scientific research, civil rights, women's rights, religious freedom, and LGBTQ people.
→ The counterfactual makes his reason for preferring one governing model explicit.
A voter gives two rival movements identical hypothetical control of parliament, courts, police, and taxation. She uses their manifestos and governing records to compare treatment of opposition parties, independent media, minorities, and judicial review.
→ The voter bases her choice on likely institutions rather than campaign branding.
Common mistakes
Using unequal assumptions
The comparison fails when one side receives checks and balances while the other is imagined with unconstrained power.
Treating the test as factual proof
A counterfactual can clarify values but cannot prove responsibility for a specific event.
Relying on slogans
Predictions should rest on doctrine, track record, and institutional evidence rather than partisan labels.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for high-level comparisons where each side has a discernible record, doctrine, or governing philosophy.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for assigning factual blame for a specific event or when evidence about either side's conduct is weak.
From the transcript
“a decent limit test for how to decide in a complicated situation who you back if you have to make a decision on who's right…”
“imagine Israel all of a sudden overnight is given control of Congress and the US Military and our taxation”
“Hamas gets control of Congress our taxation system and our military”
From the episode
Episode 302: Dr. Scott Galloway: Censorship, Anti-Semitism, and Social Media's Influence on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Dr. Scott Galloway