Simon Schama, a professor of history at Columbia University in New York, warned the US public is consuming political debates as a form of “gladiatorial entertainment”, and noted President Trump is purposefully fanning the flames.
Speaking on BBC Newsnight, he said: “Social media has made the possibility of enjoying reciprocal hatred more and more enticing for those who are entrepreneurs of hatred.
“I think actually Donald Trump did tap into the glee, the adrenaline rush of loathing, and the rallies were built around that.”
Referring to highly contentious debates, including those with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, he noted that they had become “performances” of mutual hatred.
He said: “All of the debates are really performances of mutual antagonism, and the public appetitive for television debates now is essentially a branch of entertainment, as Trump knows well.
“It is essentially a form of gladiatorial entertainment.”
However, the historian warned that President Trump’s abrasive rhetoric may have backfired in the lead-up to the crunch US midterm elections, despite energising his base during the 2016 presidential election.
Notably, President Trump held 44 rallies in advance of the November polls, and focussed heavily on contentious issues including illegal immigration rather than the economy.
Mr Schama commented on Trump’s rallies, saying: “My impression about the 2018 campaign is that the madness of the rallies, which he enjoyed working into a lather, did not work well for him.”
BBC presenter Emily Maitlis nevertheless quipped that President Trump’s base do not want him to change his tone, and are still energised by his unfiltered rhetoric.
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W Bush, concurred with Ms Maitlis and warned the President is purely “driven by impulse”.
He said: “The voices in his head don’t want him to change his tone, he is not a strategic thinker.
“Donald Trump does something and very intelligent commentators work backwards to come up with a theory of how this could possibly make sense, and they ascribe this theory to the President.
“But he is just driven by impulse.
“He can say maybe that it would be better that he was now alienating ever college educated woman in the US, and then the moment comes and he can’t control himself.”