The Thought-Stopping Playbook
How media and power use mockery, urgency, and fear to avoid accountability.
Over the last few months, I’ve become a fan of Jessica Tarlow—first through
’s video clips, then through her podcast with Scott Galloway, Raging Moderates. She’s a regular on The Five, a Fox News roundtable show featuring a rotating group of hosts who primarily echo the network’s conservative views, while Tarlow represents a more liberal position.The banter Tarlow engages in with her co-hosts is inspiring for those of us who want to stay in conversation with people who hold opposing views. At the same time, the interactions also illustrate a tendency toward “thought-stopping” behavior—patterns that keep people anchored in a fixed point of view.
The Danger of Thought-Stopping Behavior
, an expert on authoritarian control groups, describes “thought stopping” as “shutting down critical thinking; employing us-versus-them thinking; and using emotional manipulation to gain sympathy for the leader.” Thought-stopping techniques control people’s ability to hear new information by triggering automatic rejection of opposing perspectives.Rather than engaging in thoughtful debate, Tarlow’s co-hosts often respond to her logical arguments with mockery. I wonder whether these exchanges ever penetrate the minds of loyal viewers—or if hearing opposing viewpoints being shot down only serves to immunize them against the possibility of changing their minds.
Pressuring people to conform to a shared belief system is a hallmark of high-control groups. Dissent is shut down and often leads to ostracization. People adapt their thinking and remain in these groups because the pain of rejection activates the same neural pathways as physical pain. Thought-stopping phrases serve as cues to fall back in line. While these are often just dismissive comments that shut down debate, they can also take on darker, more coercive forms.
Joab Used Thought-Stopping Behavior in the Takedown of Amasa
In the Biblical narrative of ancient Israel, the story of Joab—King David’s general—illustrates how thought-stopping techniques can work. Joab cut down a rival while en route to complete a mission. His officer then demanded that the army renew their loyalty to him, even as they struggled to process what they had just witnessed.
The context for Joab’s brutality was this: King David had appointed Amasa, a distant relative, as general and sent him on a mission to stop a rebellion led by a man named Sheba. Amasa’s appointment was intended to build bridges with those who had opposed David during the earlier insurrection led by his son, Absalom.
At that time, Amasa led the army for David’s son Absalom, the insurrectionist, and Joab led the army of David. David had hoped to spare his son’s life in the ensuing battle, but Joab disobeyed the king’s orders and seized an opportunity to strike when Absalom became ensnared in a tree. Joab had a personal vendetta against Absalom and didn’t hesitate to kill him during the younger man’s uprising.
In deep mourning, David rejected Joab as general. But when Amasa, Joab’s replacement, failed to complete the mission in time, David reluctantly sent Joab to finish the task. Joab saw his moment to neutralize a threat.
When Joab caught up with Amasa, he greeted him with an embrace—then stabbed him with a hidden dagger. Amasa collapsed into a pool of his own blood while Joab continued the mission. The army was stunned, but they were compelled to follow Joab anyway. It quickly became a test of loyalty.
“One of Joab’s men stood beside Amasa and said, ‘Whoever favors Joab, and whoever is for David, let him follow Joab!’ Amasa lay wallowing in his blood in the middle of the road, and the man saw that all the troops came to a halt there. When he realized that everyone who came up to Amasa stopped, he dragged him from the road into a field and threw a garment over him. After Amasa had been removed from the road, everyone went on with Joab to pursue Sheba son of Bikri.” 2 Samuel 20:11-13
The death of Amasa was both a removal of a rival and a message that dissent would not be tolerated. The army had no time to process what had happened—they had a mission to complete. They were likely also afraid of what might happen if they questioned Joab’s actions.
The Antidote: Mental Resilience and Critical Thinking
Joab cut short any reflection that might have led to immediate consequences for his actions. His maneuver functioned as a “thought-stopping technique,” preventing the army from challenging him and rendering them compliant.
We need to recognize when such techniques are being used—and guard against them. They may appear as dismissive quips or clever retorts. They can also take the form of an exaggerated sense of urgency that makes questions feel inappropriate or irrelevant in the moment.
We need to develop the kind of mental resilience that allows us to keep asking questions while remaining anchored in our principles. In that light, perhaps the greatest impact of Tarlow’s quick wit and succinct explanations comes not during the live show, but in the clips that circulate on social media afterward. Stripped of the noise and antics of her co-hosts, her careful research and analysis can be considered by people who are genuinely open to new information—not just loyal to a faction.