When Bagong Learned from Semar's Wisdom (1)

"Why 100 days, why not just 1001 nights, Ramanda?" asked Bagong, assuming he was the next big philosopher when he went to 'the Yoda of Pewayangan', Semar.

"The evaluation of a new government within the first 100 days is a tradition that stems from the early presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR). This period is often viewed as a critical benchmark for assessing the effectiveness and direction of a new administration," Semar replied. "The first 100 days concept was popularised during FDR's presidency, which began on March 4, 1933. Faced with the Great Depression, Roosevelt implemented an aggressive agenda for economic recovery. During his initial three months in office, he managed to pass a remarkable number of legislative measures—15 major bills and a total of 77 laws—designed to address the severe economic challenges facing the nation. This rapid and bold action set a precedent for future presidents, establishing a standard against which their early performance would be measured.

In a radio address on July 25, 1933, Roosevelt referred to this initial phase as the "first 100 days," reflecting on the significant events that had transpired during that time. This term has since become symbolic of the urgency and importance of early governance actions.

'The Defining Moment: FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope' by Jonathan Alter (2006, Simon & Schuster) examines President Franklin D. Roosevelt's dynamic leadership during the initial phase of his presidency, which was instrumental in shaping the New Deal. Roosevelt's approach was characterized by swift and decisive action, a willingness to experiment with various solutions, and an ability to inspire hope among the American populace during the Great Depression. This proactive and adaptive leadership style not only facilitated the rapid implementation of New Deal policies but also established a benchmark for evaluating presidential effectiveness in the early days of an administration.

The term 'Hundred Days' refers to the period from March 9 to June 16, 1933, during which Roosevelt and Congress worked intensively to pass a series of significant legislation aimed at economic recovery. This term has since become a standard measure for assessing the early accomplishments of future presidents. In his work, Alters wrote, 'The Hundred Days themselves have been so mythologized that the real ones are barely recognizable. The phrase was borrowed from the surprisingly short time period between Napoleon’s triumphant escape from Elba and his final defeat at Waterloo in 1815. It was first used by FDR on July 24, 1933, to refer to the exactly 100 days (apparently a coincidence) that elapsed between the opening of the special session of the 73rd Congress on March 9 and its closing on June 17, a session that produced a record-breaking volume of new laws.

There was nothing intentional about a session of this length. During the first week of his presidency, FDR had expected Congress to meet for two weeks to pass his emergency agenda, then adjourn. Nor was the volume of legislation anticipated. With a 196-vote margin in the House and a 23-vote margin in the Senate, Democrats in Congress have often been depicted as merely rubber-stamping FDR’s agenda. But most of the southern Democrats were at least as conservative as Republicans, while some northern and western progressive Republicans were moving left. So while early emergency bills sailed through, most others were the product of the usual give-and-take on Capitol Hill. The urgency of the time made it horse-trading at a gallop.'

'FDR' by Jean Edward Smith (2007, Random House) provides a detailed account of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's first 100 days in office, highlighting the significant legislative achievements during this period. Smith emphasizes that Roosevelt's proactive approach led to the passage of numerous bills aimed at economic recovery and social reform, setting a high standard for future administrations.

Jean Edward Smith details President Franklin D. Roosevelt's first 100 days in office, highlighting several key achievements. Roosevelt declared a national "bank holiday" to prevent further withdrawals and restore confidence in the financial system. Congress passed the Emergency Banking Act, allowing only financially stable banks to reopen, which helped stabilize the banking sector.

Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was e established to provide employment for young men in conservation projects. The CCC addressed both unemployment and environmental concerns.

Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA) was created to support farmers by reducing crop production to raise prices. The AAA aimed to revitalize the agricultural sector.

National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) sought to stimulate industrial recovery by establishing codes of fair competition and labour standards, promoting economic growth and fair labour practices.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was established to develop the Tennessee Valley region through flood control, electrification, and economic development, serving as a model for regional planning.

These initiatives, among others, marked a significant expansion of federal involvement in economic and social welfare, setting a precedent for future government intervention during crises.

Between March 9 and June 16, 1933 (his first 100 days in office), FDR and Congress passed a remarkable 15 pieces of major legislation, tackling issues such as unemployment, banking, and agriculture. The success of this intense legislative period established a benchmark, and subsequent leaders began to be judged based on their achievements within their first 100 days.

But why 100 days? First, it is a Symbolism of the 'Grace Period. The 100 days are seen as a time when a leader or government has the most political capital and public goodwill, allowing them to enact bold changes. Second, manageable time frame. 100 days is a short but sufficient period to set priorities, establish direction, and demonstrate intent. Third, historical benchmark. The term gained prominence with FDR, and since then, it has been used as a convenient marker for evaluating early performance.

In 'The New Deal: A Modern History' by Michael Hiltzik (2011, Free Press) highlights why Franklin D. Roosevelt's first 100 days became a historical benchmark for several reasons. Hiltzik emphasizes that FDR, during his first 100 days in office (March 9 to June 16, 1933), spearheaded an extraordinary amount of legislative action in response to the Great Depression. Over 15 major pieces of legislation were enacted, addressing banking reforms, unemployment relief, and industrial recovery. This level of legislative productivity was unprecedented, creating a new standard for how quickly a government could act in times of crisis.

Hiltzik details how FDR assumed office amidst the worst economic crisis in U.S. history, with unemployment at record highs and the banking system on the verge of collapse. The public’s expectations for immediate and decisive action were immense, and FDR’s ability to deliver swift reforms established a lasting impression of what a competent administration could achieve in a short period.

Hiltzik explains how FDR’s initiatives during the first 100 days fundamentally reshaped the role of the federal government. Programs like the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) signalled a shift toward federal intervention in economic and social issues. These efforts set the tone for the broader New Deal and demonstrated the potential for transformative governance in a limited timeframe. According to Hiltzik, FDR’s first 100 days were not just about policy but also about restoring hope and confidence in the American public. His innovative use of 'fireside chats' to communicate directly with citizens reassured them that their government was actively working to address their concerns.

Hiltzik underscores that FDR’s success in his first 100 days became a measuring stick for future administrations, as it showed how a leader could mobilize resources, forge alliances, and seize a political mandate to tackle crises. Although the term 'first 100 days' was not initially coined by FDR himself, the historical significance of this period set a precedent for evaluating the effectiveness of leadership during early governance.

Hiltzik portrays FDR's first 100 days as a defining moment in American history, not only for its immediate impact on alleviating the Great Depression but also for creating a symbolic benchmark of governmental efficacy. The combination of urgency, innovation, and decisive action during these early days left an indelible mark on how future leaders are assessed.

What are the evaluation criteria in the First 100 Days? First, policy implementation: How many and what types of policies or reforms have been initiated? Second, public perception: Is the government fulfilling campaign promises or setting the tone for its administration? Third, crisis management: How effectively is the government addressing immediate challenges?

In 'Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal' (2020, the University Press of Kansas), Stephen Skowronek explores how U.S. presidents, including Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR), leverage their early days in office to establish political authority, which significantly influences their long-term leadership effectiveness. Skowronek's "political time" thesis posits that presidents operate within a framework shaped by their predecessors and the prevailing political context. In their early days, presidents must navigate these historical legacies while asserting their authority to implement change. This involves, first, reckoning with predecessors. New presidents must address the political commitments and failures of previous administrations. For instance, FDR confronted the dire economic situation left by Herbert Hoover, which necessitated immediate and bold action. Second, situating power within current events. Presidents often capitalize on contemporary political dynamics to bolster their authority. FDR's New Deal initiatives were a direct response to the Great Depression, allowing him to frame his leadership as a necessary remedy for national crises. Third, claiming authority. Early actions set the tone for how presidents are perceived and can enhance their political capital. Successful early initiatives can create a sense of momentum that benefits future policy efforts.

The effectiveness of a president's long-term leadership is often contingent upon how well they manage these early challenges. Skowronek identifies several outcomes based on a president's ability to navigate their initial days. Presidents like FDR are seen as transformational leaders who successfully reconstructed the political landscape through decisive early actions. This legacy allows them to exert lasting influence over subsequent administrations and policy directions.

Skowronek outlines how different political contexts—such as periods of disjunction or reconstruction—affect presidential authority. FDR's ability to redefine the role of government during a time of crisis exemplifies successful leadership in a period of reconstruction.

Skowronek also discusses how modern presidents must contend with a 24-hour news cycle and public scrutiny, which can amplify or undermine their early efforts. The ability to communicate effectively and maintain public support is crucial for sustaining authority over time.

In summary, Skowronek's analysis underscores that the first days of a presidency are critical for establishing authority and setting the stage for long-term effectiveness. By examining historical parallels and contemporary challenges, he provides insights into the evolving nature of presidential leadership in American politics.

Franklin D. Roosevelt's early leadership style was distinct from that of many other U.S. presidents, characterized by a combination of charisma, boldness, and a willingness to experiment with policy in response to the Great Depression. This approach set a new standard for presidential leadership and has been analyzed in various scholarly works, including Stephen Skowronek's work.

FDR was known for his exceptional ability to connect with the American public. His use of radio, particularly through his "fireside chats," allowed him to communicate directly and personally with citizens, fostering a sense of trust and reassurance. This contrasts with previous presidents who may have relied more heavily on formal addresses or written communications. His charismatic style not only made him relatable but also helped him rally public support for his policies during a time of crisis.

FDR's leadership was marked by a willingness to take bold actions and experiment with new policies. He famously stated, “The country needs — and, unless I mistake its temper — the country demands bold, persistent experimentation.” This approach led to the rapid implementation of the New Deal programs aimed at economic recovery. Unlike some predecessors who may have been more cautious or conservative in their policy approaches, FDR embraced a trial-and-error methodology that allowed for quick adaptation based on outcomes.

FDR centralized decision-making within his administration, particularly in foreign relations and domestic policy. He often sought advice from a diverse group of experts while ultimately retaining control over the final decisions. This contrasts with leaders like Woodrow Wilson, who relied more on formal channels and advisors without as much direct public engagement. FDR’s method allowed him to maintain a strong grip on his agenda while remaining responsive to public sentiment.

FDR emphasized collaboration among his advisors and cabinet members, bringing together individuals from various political backgrounds to address the nation’s challenges. This contrasted with previous administrations that may have favoured more hierarchical or partisan approaches. His inclusive strategy helped build broad coalitions that were essential for passing significant legislation during his first 100 days.

The characteristics of FDR's early leadership style had lasting implications for his effectiveness throughout his presidency. His ability to connect with the public fostered trust, which was crucial for implementing controversial reforms. The boldness of his early actions set a precedent for aggressive government intervention in the economy, reshaping American political expectations. FDR's willingness to experiment allowed him to pivot quickly in response to changing circumstances, which is an essential trait for effective leadership.

Critics of the practice of evaluating a government's performance within the first 100 days argue that this timeframe is often arbitrary and does not provide a comprehensive view of a president's effectiveness. We'll discuss it in the next session, biidhnillah."

*) Ramanda means father
**) Pewayangan means Javanese (or Indonesian) puppet world

[Part 2]

Bahasa

Time Machine (15)

"The idea of a time machine allows us to revisit the past and examine the decisions, policies, and actions that led to current circumstances," said the time traveller. "If we could 'travel back in time,' we might evaluate land management practices, deforestation, and urban expansion into fire-prone areas. Past neglect of climate change mitigation strategies could be revisited, highlighting where proactive measures might have averted some impacts. Indigenous communities historically used controlled burns to manage vegetation. A metaphorical time machine could help us re-integrate these lessons from the past into modern practices.

A time machine often places characters in a position to face the immediate consequences of past actions. Today’s wildfire crisis reflects decades of unchecked urban sprawl, emphasising the cost of ignoring ecological boundaries. Present-day wildfires are intensified by global warming—an ongoing consequence of industrial-era carbon emissions. The idea of time travel often serves as a warning, urging us to change our trajectory to prevent catastrophic outcomes. If current patterns persist, future wildfires may become even more devastating. The time machine challenges us to make sustainable choices now.

Time travel stories often reveal how history repeats itself unless lessons are learned. Wildfires have been part of California’s ecosystem for centuries, but human intervention (or lack thereof) has exacerbated their intensity and frequency. Learning from past disasters—such as the 2018 Camp Fire—can help prevent future catastrophes. A wildfire, known as the Sunset Fire, recently broke out in the Hollywood Hills, prompting evacuations and threatening nearby landmarks.

The most affected areas in Los Angeles from the recent wildfires include: Pacific Palisades, the Palisades Fire has burned over 23,000 acres and destroyed more than 1,000 structures, leading to significant evacuations; Eaton Fire, this fire has impacted northern Los Angeles, consuming over 14,000 acres and also prompting evacuations. Hollywood Hills, the Sunset Fire has threatened this iconic area, damaging homes along Sunset Boulevard; Pasadena, residents have faced evacuations and property damage due to the fires spreading from surrounding regions.

There is no credible evidence to support the claim that the recent wildfires in Los Angeles are being used as a pretext for the construction of a 'Smart City.' The wildfires are primarily attributed to a combination of extreme drought conditions, high temperatures, and powerful Santa Ana winds, which have created a highly combustible environment. Investigations into the specific causes of the fires are ongoing, with officials ruling out common ignition sources like lightning and focusing instead on human activity and utility lines as potential triggers.

The wildfires have resulted in significant destruction, with tens of thousands of acres burned and thousands of homes lost. The situation has drawn attention to the broader implications of climate change on fire behaviour in California.

At least 24 people have lost their lives due to the fires. Approximately 150,000 residents have been evacuated from their homes. Over 12,000 structures have been destroyed, including homes, businesses, and cultural landmarks. Around 64,000 individuals are without power due to damage to the electrical grid.

Economic damages are estimated between $135 billion and $150 billion, potentially making these wildfires the costliest natural disaster in U.S. history. The fires have significantly deteriorated air quality, posing health risks to residents, especially those with respiratory conditions. Landmarks such as the Will Rogers Ranch House and the Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center have been destroyed. Firefighters are battling strong winds, which hinder containment efforts and pose risks of further spread. Authorities, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, are investigating potential causes, with suspicions ranging from arson to faulty equipment.

The situation remains critical, with emergency services working tirelessly to manage the disaster and support affected communities.

There have been multiple conspiracy theories surrounding wildfires in Los Angeles and other parts of California. While these theories lack solid evidence and are often debunked, they tend to arise during or after major wildfire events.

Some conspiracy theorists claim that wildfires are caused by high-tech weapons, such as lasers or directed energy beams, intentionally targeting specific areas. This theory often gains traction when photos or videos of unusual fire patterns are shared online, though such patterns are typically explainable by natural fire behavior, wind, and fuel conditions.

Another theory suggests that wildfires are intentionally set or allowed to spread to clear land for government projects, housing developments, or corporate interests. Proponents of this theory believe fires are a strategy to force people out of certain areas for economic gain.

Some allege that environmental activists or groups intentionally start fires to bring attention to climate change or ecological issues. Others believe arson is committed to manipulating public sentiment about forest management policies or logging.

Climate Engineering, this theory posits that wildfires are a byproduct of geoengineering experiments, such as weather modification programs involving chemicals dispersed into the atmosphere. Advocates of this theory argue that such activities disrupt weather patterns, making areas more susceptible to drought and fire.

To unpack the conspiracy theories and connect them with the realities of wildfire occurrences, let’s analyze each theory more deeply while considering scientific findings and logical interpretations.

Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs). Proponents argue that laser-based weapons are used to start fires intentionally. They cite images of 'unusual burn patterns,' such as melted cars next to unburned vegetation, as 'proof.' Unusual burn patterns are often due to wind direction, fire intensity, and the flammability of materials. For instance, cars are made of metal and plastic, which can ignite under intense heat, while some plants retain moisture and resist burning. The energy required to ignite fires from space or at a distance with precision would be immense and impractical with current technology. Misinformation possibly spreads rapidly during disasters, and photos out of context fuel these theories. The real culprit is likely poor communication and misunderstanding of fire dynamics.

Government or Corporate Land Grabs. This theory claims that wildfires are orchestrated to clear land for high-value developments, infrastructure, or corporate projects. While land-use conflicts exist, there is no credible evidence linking wildfires to systematic, deliberate clearing for such projects. Environmental laws in California make land acquisition from burned areas complicated. Urban sprawl into wildfire-prone areas creates a perception of targeting, but it's more a reflection of growing populations and housing demand. The focus should shift to policy debates about wildfire prevention and urban planning rather than unproven theories. Poor planning in high-risk zones is a tangible issue.

Eco-Terrorism or Sabotage. Some claim wildfires are started by activists to promote an environmental agenda or by political factions to manipulate policies.

While a small percentage of wildfires are caused by arson, these acts are rarely tied to organized movements. More often, they are the result of individuals with malicious intent or negligence. Climate change is a pressing issue, and wildfires are a natural byproduct of rising global temperatures. The connection is logical but not orchestrated. Awareness campaigns around wildfires and climate change are warranted, but they shouldn't be conflated with conspiracy. Education and climate action are better tools for addressing the root causes.

Climate Engineering. Some believe wildfires result from geoengineering experiments (e.g., "chemtrails") disrupting weather patterns or intentionally drying out areas.

Geoengineering research exists, but it focuses on theoretical solutions to climate change, not weather manipulation. No evidence supports claims of intentional drought creation. California’s wildfires are exacerbated by a combination of climate change (hotter, drier conditions), poor forest management, and seasonal winds like the Santa Ana. These are natural phenomena, not engineered outcomes. Climate change is undeniably linked to wildfire severity. Policies focusing on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to a changing climate are practical responses to this crisis.

These conspiracy theories are not supported by credible evidence. The causes of wildfires are well-documented by experts and include natural factors (like lightning strikes) and human activities (such as powerline malfunctions, campfires, and arson). Climate change, poor forest management, and increasing urban-wildland interfaces exacerbate the frequency and intensity of these fires.

So, why do these theories emerge? People often distrust government agencies and corporations, leading them to question official explanations. Social media amplifies speculation and unverified claims, especially during high-stress events like wildfires. The science of wildfires and climate change is nuanced, making it easy for oversimplified or misinterpreted theories to take root.

The most plausible explanation for increased wildfires is a combination of natural and human-driven factors, primarily linked to climate change and land management. While conspiracy theories highlight societal mistrust and the desire for simple explanations, addressing the issue requires focusing on, among others, strengthening wildfire prevention and response strategies; implementing sustainable land-use policies; and investing in climate change mitigation.

A time machine offers individuals and societies a moment of introspection. Reflecting on the personal losses caused by wildfires underscores the need for collective action. Just as time machines often highlight the interconnectedness of actions, wildfires remind us of the collective responsibility in addressing climate change.

Now let’s explore further the connections between Sunnatullah, natural disasters like the wildfires in Los Angeles, and the broader implications of political tensions, including President-elect Donald Trump’s warnings about the Middle East.

First, natural disasters in light of Sunnatullah. Natural disasters, such as the wildfires in Los Angeles, are manifestations of Allah's laws that govern the universe. These events are not arbitrary but occur within the framework of divine wisdom and justice.

In Islam, humans are seen as stewards (Khalifah) of the Earth, entrusted with its care and maintenance. The Quran states,

وَاِلٰى ثَمُوْدَ اَخَاهُمْ صٰلِحًا ۘ قَالَ يٰقَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللّٰهَ مَا لَكُمْ مِّنْ اِلٰهٍ غَيْرُهٗ ۗهُوَ اَنْشَاَكُمْ مِّنَ الْاَرْضِ وَاسْتَعْمَرَكُمْ فِيْهَا فَاسْتَغْفِرُوْهُ ثُمَّ تُوْبُوْٓا اِلَيْهِ ۗاِنَّ رَبِّيْ قَرِيْبٌ مُّجِيْبٌ

'And to Thamūd [We sent] their brother Saliḥ. He said, 'O my people, worship Allah; you have no deity other than Him. He has produced you from the earth and settled you in it, so ask forgiveness of Him and then repent to Him. Indeed, my Rabb is near and responsive.' [QS. Hud (11):61]

The widespread destruction caused by wildfires can often be traced back to human negligence, such as climate change resulting from excessive consumption and industrial activity; deforestation that disrupts ecosystems; and poor urban planning that ignores the risks posed by natural forces.

Sunnatullah in this context reminds us that when humans violate the balance (mizan) established by Allah, the consequences are inevitable. This aligns with the Quranic warning,

اَلَّا تَطْغَوْا فِى الْمِيْزَانِ وَاَقِيْمُوا الْوَزْنَ بِالْقِسْطِ وَلَا تُخْسِرُوا الْمِيْزَانَ

'That you do not transgress within the balance. And establish weight in justice and do not make deficient the balance.' [QS. Ar-Rahman (55):8-9]

Natural disasters serve multiple purposes in Islamic theology. As a reminder of Allah’s Power, they demonstrate the might of Allah, reminding people that despite their technological advances, they remain dependent on Him. It is a test of faith and patience. For believers, such trials are an opportunity to demonstrate patience (sabr) and reliance on Allah (tawakkul). It is also an opportunity for Repentance. The Quran links trials with the chance for moral and spiritual reform,

وَلَقَدْ اَرْسَلْنَآ اِلٰٓى اُمَمٍ مِّنْ قَبْلِكَ فَاَخَذْنٰهُمْ بِالْبَأْسَاۤءِ وَالضَّرَّاۤءِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَضَرَّعُوْنَ

'And We have already sent [messengers] to nations before you, [O Muḥammad]; then We seized them with poverty and hardship that perhaps they might humble themselves [to Us].' [QS. Al-An'am (6):42]

The wildfires, therefore, serve as a moment for collective reflection: Are we fulfilling our role as stewards of the Earth? Are we living in harmony with the natural laws Allah has set?

Next, political tensions and sunnatullah. President-elect Donald Trump’s warning that "all hell will break out" in the Middle East if hostages are not freed reflects the precarious balance of power in global politics. Sunni Islam provides guidance on the nature of power, leadership, and conflict, which can be analyzed in light of Sunnatullah.

وَلَا تَرْكَنُوْٓا اِلَى الَّذِيْنَ ظَلَمُوْا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُۙ وَمَا لَكُمْ مِّنْ دُوْنِ اللّٰهِ مِنْ اَوْلِيَاۤءَ ثُمَّ لَا تُنْصَرُوْنَ

'And do not incline toward those who do wrong, lest you be touched by the Fire, and you would not have other than Allāh any protectors; then you would not be helped.' [QS. Hud (11):113]

Trump’s rhetoric, if it leads to unnecessary escalation, could result in immense human suffering. It reflects the Quranic principle that unchecked ambition or arrogance often leads to disaster.

Islam teaches that when oppression (zulm) becomes widespread, it invites divine consequences. The Quran recounts the stories of past nations destroyed due to their tyranny,

وَكَاَيِّنْ مِّنْ قَرْيَةٍ عَتَتْ عَنْ اَمْرِ رَبِّهَا وَرُسُلِهٖ فَحَاسَبْنٰهَا حِسَابًا شَدِيْدًاۙ وَّعَذَّبْنٰهَا عَذَابًا نُّكْرًا

'And how many a city was insolent toward the command of its Lord and His messengers, so We took it to severe account and punished it with a terrible punishment.' [QS. At-Talaq (65):8]

If political actions ignore justice, peace, and the sanctity of life, they risk perpetuating cycles of violence that could engulf the region and beyond.

From an Islamic perspective, the natural and political realms are deeply interconnected, as both operate under Sunnatullah. Human beings are accountable for their collective actions, whether in how they treat the environment or how they manage conflicts. Just as neglecting environmental responsibility leads to disasters like wildfires, neglecting justice in political matters leads to widespread chaos. Both are reminders of the need to align human actions with divine guidance.The interconnected nature of today’s world means that no nation or individual can act in isolation. A fire in Los Angeles or a political crisis in the Middle East affects everyone. The Prophet (ﷺ) said, ''The example of the believers in their mutual love, mercy, and compassion is like that of a body: If one part of the body aches, the whole body reacts with sleeplessness and fever.' (Sahih al-Bukhari & Muslim)

Islam encourages proactive efforts to address both environmental and political crises. These include: recognizing collective mistakes and turning to Allah for guidance; working across communities and nations to find just solutions to crises; helping those affected by disasters and conflicts, and fulfilling the Quranic call to support the oppressed.

In Islam, arrogance (kibr) is a trait strongly condemned, particularly in leaders. Leadership carries an immense responsibility to act justly and with humility, as the consequences of their decisions affect countless people. When leaders act arrogantly—disregarding justice, truth, and divine guidance—it often leads to widespread harm.

The Quran frequently addresses the downfall of arrogant leaders who defied Allah’s commands and oppressed their people such as Pharaoh or 'Ad and Tsamud. These examples show that arrogance often invites Allah’s warnings, through trials or calamities, giving leaders and nations a chance to repent and change their ways.

Disasters and crises remind humanity of its vulnerability and the need for humility before Allah. They serve as opportunities for leaders and individuals to recognize their mistakes, turn to Allah in repentance, and realign their actions with justice and mercy. Events like wildfires and political instability remind us that human power is limited. Leaders, no matter how influential, are ultimately subject to Allah’s decree:

وَلَا تَمْشِ فِى الْاَرْضِ مَرَحًاۚ اِنَّكَ لَنْ تَخْرِقَ الْاَرْضَ وَلَنْ تَبْلُغَ الْجِبَالَ طُوْلًا

'And do not walk upon the earth exultantly. Indeed, you will never tear the earth [apart], and you will never reach the mountains in height (Man, for all his arrogance, is yet a weak and small creature).' [QS. Al-Isra (17):37]

When leaders persist in arrogance, corruption, or injustice, the divine laws of Sunnatullah lead to inevitable consequences. Leaders who act selfishly or recklessly often create ripple effects of instability, suffering, and destruction—both for themselves and those under their rule. Sometimes, calamities are consequences of collective arrogance or neglect. For example, environmental disasters like wildfires can result from years of human mismanagement and disregard for Allah’s natural laws. President-elect Donald Trump’s rhetoric, particularly the statement that 'all hell will break out' if hostages in the Middle East are not freed, reflects an approach that could escalate tensions and harm. Such language can be linked to arrogance, as it conveys: first, overconfidence in power, believing that force or threats can solve deeply rooted conflicts, without addressing the underlying injustices or grievances. Secondly, disregard for Consequences. Arrogant leaders may act without considering the wider implications of their actions, leading to greater harm and suffering.

If such actions stem from arrogance and are not corrected, they align with the Quranic principle of consequences for oppressive leadership,

وَلَا تَحْسَبَنَّ اللّٰهَ غَافِلًا عَمَّا يَعْمَلُ الظّٰلِمُوْنَ ەۗ اِنَّمَا يُؤَخِّرُهُمْ لِيَوْمٍ تَشْخَصُ فِيْهِ الْاَبْصَارُۙ

'And never think that Allah is unaware of what the wrongdoers do. He only delays them [i.e., their account] for a Day when eyes will stare [in horror].' [QS. Ibrahim (14):42]

The current events—wildfires in Los Angeles and political tensions in the Middle East—can be seen as both warnings and consequences, depending on their context and how they are addressed. If they result from human arrogance, they serve as a stark reminder of the divine laws (Sunnatullah) that govern the world. Leaders, particularly those in positions of great influence, have a responsibility to act humbly, justly, and with foresight, lest they face the consequences of their actions.

By recognizing these events as opportunities for reflection and reform, both individuals and nations can realign themselves with the principles of justice, humility, and reliance on Allah.

Sunnatullah is evident in the balance and order of the universe. Just as physical laws like gravity are immutable, so are the moral and spiritual laws governing human behaviour. Understanding these laws requires reflection and spiritual awareness. Failing to learn from history and the signs of Sunnatullah is due to spiritual blindness, not physical limitations. The Quran states,

اَفَلَمْ يَسِيْرُوْا فِى الْاَرْضِ فَتَكُوْنَ لَهُمْ قُلُوْبٌ يَّعْقِلُوْنَ بِهَآ اَوْ اٰذَانٌ يَّسْمَعُوْنَ بِهَاۚ فَاِنَّهَا لَا تَعْمَى الْاَبْصَارُ وَلٰكِنْ تَعْمَى الْقُلُوْبُ الَّتِيْ فِى الصُّدُوْرِ

'So have they not traveled through the earth and have hearts by which to reason and ears by which to hear? For indeed, it is not eyes that are blinded, but blinded are the hearts which are within the breasts.' [QS. Al-Hajj(22):46]

Sunnatullah ensures that those who neglect reflection and reject guidance face the consequences of their actions. Sunnatullah is constant, reinforcing that the outcomes of human actions, whether obedience or defiance, will always follow divine patterns. And Allah knows best."

[Session 1]

[Session 14]

Bahasa