Category: Uncategorized

Association of States

3.2.3             Association of States  

 

States organize control in their territories to achieve more benefits for the people. However, when such authority does not suit the nature of a society, the states conduct an alienated, autocratic, and authoritative policy. Such a policy creates an irrational and unstable economy for the people, inappropriate and unjust orientation among nations, tensions and risks in relations among the states. As a result, the states are responsible for massive bloodshed in the history of humankind.  

The present-day world does not know any model of mutual coexistence that can ensure the prosperity of humanity. On the contrary, the present-day world’s relations are based on a dangerous and ruthless competition of determinations and not on cooperation. The current world policy is creating objective injustices between the states, caused by enormous differences in the level of economic development and in the right to use natural resources. On one side is excessive production, and on the other, scarcity.

 

The history of humankind recorded some attempts at building a better world through association. In that endeavour, world organizations were established to bring closer states and nations into an interdependent whole that complements. For this reason, the Organization of the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, Interpol, international health organizations, and many others were established. These organizations had to connect the idea of creating a better planet Earth. Moreover, they were supposed to bring benefits due to the greater association of nations, labour and capital, a more substantial production, more incredible wealth and, accordingly, greater welfare. Furthermore, such organizations were supposed to reduce the possibility of an emergence of war conflict between states. However, the result is contrary to expectations. Despite some positive impacts, these organizations are generally used for winning predominance globally and represent a threat to humanity. 

 

However, there is no doubt that the greatest danger in the world arises from the alienation imposed by the authorities. People live in an alienated, selfish, narcissistic world where they form alienated needs. Alienation can deceive an individual into overcoming their impotence before nature, but no activity can realize it, and therefore an alienated individual is generally insatiable and unsatisfied. Non-satisfied alienated needs represent an origin of destructive energy, which daily brings enormous problems to the world. Alienation is a disease afflicting the world, whether rich or poor. Authorities may easily canalize such destructive energy to destroy any of its parts. Of course, the most influenced people worldwide are the most dangerous. As the world has not managed to overcome its alienated orientation, it has not found the base for accomplishing its prosperity.  

 

Today, the world is proud of developing technology and production, but it did not move a single step forward in developing human consciousness. Moreover, people enter a period of significant worldwide degradation of fundamental human values. In this connection, one cannot say that all negative phenomena, destructions, and wars belong to the past. This problem has been raised to a higher level with technology development and is threatening humankind more than ever before.  

 

***

 

OK, but what is missing to change the situation? Knowledge is missing! This book presents the knowledge necessary to form a sound and sane society. It will take power away from the authorities and give it to the people. Socialism can efficiently solve all of the aforementioned problems. It respects democracy, human rights, general and special individual interests, past and current labour, and the values emerging from natural constructive interpersonal relations. It prevents the existence of alienation, privileges, hegemony, exploitation, and any form of destructiveness. The new system is so productive and elastic that inhabitants of other states can accept it. Such an act opens up the possibility of the association at the level of states. Once the integration process among the states has started, the associated states at the international level will be just a matter of time.  

 

By associating, the states lose a part of their sovereignty because they assign it to the union of states but also, they realize at the same time new social life qualities. When humankind accepts the described socio-economic system, the world will function as a commune. For the first time, the world will exactly know, at any point in time, how many inhabitants it has and what their individual and collective needs are. For the first time, it will be able to pursue a reasonable, rational policy and satisfy the population’s needs.  

 

In a socialist world, each inhabitant will have the freedom to act on the territory of the whole world. They will have the freedom to choose a place to live and what work to do anywhere worldwide. Freedom will have one limitation. The individual will not be free to cause disadvantages to any member of society. The system will develop very effective protection for everyone from troubles committed by any community member.

 

Democratic anarchy will allow each inhabitant to assess any convenience or inconvenience they experience from any point in the world. They will do it by making a direct statement in the administrative world centre or its satellite, the commune. The system of assessments can form a completely new system of values in the world, valorize and sanction any disadvantage and reward any advantage that the individual causes to another individual. As such assessments will directly impact an evaluated individual’s income and past labour points, everyone will be responsible before the whole world. They will try to produce the least possible inconveniences and a maximum number of conveniences for the world, thus forming the base of the productive, constructive orientation of the whole world. 

 

The new system envisages direct statements of all world inhabitants about the essential political, economic and other areas of joint interest. In this way, the rules of collective action will be established in a direct democratic way. 

 

The social system would form the world monetary policy and money distribution. The collective money would be directly and democratically earmarked by humankind for the world’s individual spending, collective spending, economic development, and all partial spheres of interest.  

 

The new socialist system introduces in all states a universally established value in the form of the price of labour, which objectively presents the past and current labour values of all workers in the world. Upon such values, all other economic values may be built to establish a just distribution of all forms of conveniences and inconveniences arising from the past and current labour of all workers. Those are precisely the elements missing today to establish a stable, productive economic policy and, therefore, society’s general stability. 

 

The new economic system envisages a worldwide association of the economy into one large enterprise of the world, world leadership, world planning of the production, and world labour distribution according to the principle of free labour competition. The managers of the world will manage the work in the world as a whole rationally and efficiently. That would form high and stable economic productivity that would optimally satisfy the material needs of the entire humankind. Furthermore, the free labour market will abolish work privileges in the world, which will inevitably entail planning production, labour, and wage distribution that optimally suit the interests of all of humankind and each inhabitant.  

 

Such a system will allow each inhabitant to get to know their natural needs through their practice and, in this way, overcome alienation. The possibility of expressing each individual’s direct genuine interest will free the society from alienated ideological, national, religious, cultural, economic and other alienated interests. Individuals will finally have the chance to live their lives fully, and they will not care about alienated values. The nature of the individual is unique to humankind. By bringing the individuals closer to their nature, the conditions will be created to form a harmonious and homogenous social community in the entire world. 

 

Each individual will rely on their forces in meeting their own needs and learn how to form them according to their possibilities of realization. This will represent the basis for meeting needs and, consequently, the constructive orientation of society.  The people who permanently satisfy their needs are not destructive. Such a system will form genuine equality among people. In such a world, the narcissistic trait of the character as the chief cause of alienation and conflicts among people will be overcome to the benefit of natural cooperative relations. 

 

The states and nations will no longer be endangered in such a system. It may be expected that the funds intended for armed forces will be abolished by the direct voting of the population, which would disallow the emergence of wars.  

 

The proposed system will form a new consciousness of the individual, new ethics of the society, and new relations in the world. Such a system will enable safety, a convenient existence, and spiritual and material prosperity for all world inhabitants. Shortly, it will form the bright future of humankind. As such a socio-economic system will be directly created by humanity, the state as a form of authoritative pressure over the society will be no longer needed. 

Pooling of Economy

3.2.2           Association of the Economy

 

A larger social community offers more potent possibilities for developing the economy and, accordingly, greater prosperity of society. At the same time, it requires a more concerted effort to accomplish coordination of collective actions. Every society strives to achieve economic prosperity but cannot because people have not defined methods to achieve more significant and more stable economic progress than capitalism offers.

 

The socialism presented in this book defines new elements that can significantly improve the economic policy of society. Socialism will be based on the agreement of the most productive manufacturers, which allows for maximal productivity of the economy and relative stability of the system. The stability of the new economic system will be based on a steady production, stable prices of products, regular incomes and the known needs of the population. Sound production and distribution are preconditions for the stability of a state.  

 

The association of communes into a state allows a higher degree of labour distribution with the total employment of workers, as demonstrated in the commune. Leadership will direct the work to use the regional and manufacturing possibilities of certain communes maximally. Socialism will lead to the merging of enterprises, diminishing competition between enterprises with similar production programs until it eliminates it. Vertical hierarchical subordination will ensure a rational production and a stable business activity.

 

Socialism will garner significant productivity by lowering enterprise competition to the level of work posts. The right to work within the state will be exercised through the competition of work among workers. Any inhabitant will be able to compete for any work post in the whole state. The work competition will, on one side, give an objective value to each work and, on the other, improve the productivity of each work post. A socialist state will, in this way, achieve a more productive and stable economy than capitalism can.  

 

Free work choice in the state also opens up the problem of excessive migrations of the population from economically less developed to economically more developed regions. Such migrations would make production planning more difficult and reduce the stability of businesses.  

 

State leaders will be required to consider the interests of all inhabitants of all communes when organizing regional economic productions. If the state managers are unsuccessful, that will cause migrations to regions with privileged status. Also, that would undoubtedly increase work competition for the limited number of work posts in privileged communes, and without a doubt, that would dissatisfy many people. State leaders, who would not offer an equal chance to all communes to develop, would receive negative evaluations from dissatisfied people. Negative evaluations would decrease the bad leaders’ incomes and quantity of past labour points. Unsuccessful leaders will be responsible to the people for the first time and therefore would have to leave their positions. Only the most skilful and brave people would dare to lead countries. This is a good enough warranty of the state’s prosperity. 

 

Socialism will completely solve the problem of working migrations from non-developed to developed communes with the past labour points of workers. Workers in non-developed communes have less valuable past labour because their contribution to building their economy is smaller. They also accomplish lower productivity and, therefore, realize smaller profits and income. Smaller incomes lead to a smaller amount of past labour points as a permanent form presenting their overall power. By migrating from one commune to another, the workers bring the past labour points that form their income. By moving to work in more developed areas, they will realize a relatively equal income for the same work as in the non-developed communes. In socialism, income will not be the factor that will stimulate workers to migrate from non-developed to developed communes.  

 

Hence, migrations of workers will be possible, but from the point of view of income and past labour points, they will be non-stimulating. On the contrary, workers will be more motivated to remain in non-developed regions, as such areas can, based on grants intended for economic development, achieve a faster increase in profit and, consequently, a more significant increase in incomes and quantity of the past labour points.  

 

The system envisages an establishment of responsibility for the workers, enterprises, and communes to realize a productive life, as demonstrated in the commune. The accountability will be performed through workers’ income and past labour points. The system also envisages the establishment of responsibility through mutual assessments of inhabitants, consumers, associations, arbitrations, and evaluation committees at the state level. This will guarantee the establishment of responsible relations in the state’s economy and the prosperity of such a state.  

 

***

 

Socialism can ensure a considerably higher degree of stability in society and coordination of its activities than capitalism. This will be achieved by pooling money and by its democratic control. The new system forms a single mass of funds that society will distribute onto all forms of spending according to market and democratically established principles.

 

Thus far, the state leadership performed the state’s macro-economic policy regulation, i.e. the fundamentals of social relations. This means that autocrats have always ruled society. As authorities often pursue interests that do not sufficiently represent the social interests, the population often remains dissatisfied with the authorities’ decisions. Moreover, the decisions made by leaders are alienated from the people, and therefore, the people cannot accept them as their own.  

 

One may say that the present-day macro-economic policy has reached its maximum efficiency. Further development of economic relations can be allowed only by utilizing democracy in the economy. In socialism, each inhabitant will create the macro-economic policy of the state by direct participation in the distribution of collective money. Thus, by distributing joint money, the people will directly form an economic policy of socialism. 

 

The sum of all residents’ statements in the function of their economic voting power will

replace the monetary, credit, development, income, and fiscal policies of capitalism. Direct distribution of collective money will drastically reduce alienation in production and distribution. At the same time, the economy will get the macro-economic orientation guidelines of its activity and thereby the elements for a higher degree of stability in business activities.  

 

The state issues money. The total money supply in circulation needs to be formed approximately between the value of the entire commodities produced and the overall realized profit on the market, as described in the commune. The system allows relatively easy control of the money in circulation and, thereby, robust control over inflationary and deflationary processes, ensuring stability in the economy’s business activity.  

 

The entire mass of money envisaged for the turnover of commodities in the state is distributed to cash assets intended for the communes and cash assets designed for the use of the state. The ratio of the money intended for the communes and the state is determined directly by democratic statements made by all state inhabitants in the function of individual economic voting powers within possible value ranges set by the state leadership.

 

Cash assets intended for the communes are distributed proportionately to the realized profits on the market. But also, the assets of the commune will depend on the protection and improvement of society and its environment. More significant improvement of society and its environment will achieve a more substantial share in distributing the funds among the communes. This has already been discussed in the chapter “Income Distribution.” This means that each commune will receive at its disposal as much money as it deserves with its overall productive orientation.

 

By pooling the money earned in all communes, it is possible to make some deviations from the revenues of communes to ensure a stable income for all communes. Namely, suppose in the case of a natural catastrophe or terrible work results, a commune registers a significant loss of money. In that case, the income of such a commune can be covered by the collective fund and gradually reduced until the economy in the commune becomes consolidated and then start growing again. In this way, the system ensures the economic stability of all communes.  

 

The population of productive communes may experience the spillover of income between and among the communes as unfavourable. However, considering that the spillover would not be significant nor frequent and would ensure the communes’ stable income, it can be assumed that the inhabitants of all communes in socialism will accept such an insurance policy. The asset realized for the commune’s expenses will be fully sovereignly distributed by the principles people accepted.  

 

Monetary assets intended for the union of communes serve the whole state’s collective spending and development needs. Such funds are formed and distributed by direct voting by all state inhabitants. It is worth mentioning that more assets intended for the state diminish proportionately the resources envisioned for the communes. In the portion of money earmarked for the state needs, communes lose their economic sovereignty.   

 

Money assets intended for the collective spending of the state are distributed per group, as are the assets earmarked for collaborative expenditure on the commune. The only difference is that the assets satisfy the needs of the state. The funds are used to maintain and build the requirements of state administration and defence, infrastructure, health, education, science, culture and sports, and other purposes that are needed by all residents of the state and represent an excessive investment burden for each commune.

 

Collective money assets are used according to the possibilities and are directly distributed by the state’s population identically to the one described in the commune. Direct expression of inhabitants’ views by votes is one of the most critical measures of socialism. Besides other benefits, the population having ruling power will try to get to know the needs of its state. Socialism will contribute to the disalienation of the people from the state so that they will accept it as its own to a greater extent. 

 

Assets intended for the economic development of the state service the developmental needs of the associated economy, for significant investments of some communes, and for all enterprises unable to realize the assets necessary for economic development in their communes. Assets are distributed to enterprises according to the size of the development coefficient in the same way as in the commune. Enterprises envisaging a more significant profit based on a smaller amount of necessary cash assets over a shorter turnover period will ensure the amount of money intended for economic development.

 

Cash assets are allocated as grants, as they are renewed from the state’s revenue in each accounting period. The whole state will then be associated with a single corporation, and companies do not have to repay themselves invested money. Enterprises are bound to realize the envisaged monetary gains within a determined period. In this way, cash assets intended for economic development would achieve their objective, and the whole financial system would find its sufficient justification.  

 

It may be assumed that the economically developed communes will be less interested in expanding their development, as their living standard will be so high that they may approach the level of saturation. A rise in productivity of a developed commune may entail a risk in terms of profit realization due to the saturation of the market and insufficient purchasing power of non-developed communes. Underdeveloped communes will require more money for economic development, and democracy will require developed communes to set aside more funds for development than they need. This fact offers a better chance to non-developed communes to ensure more money assets for development than they could themselves provide for this purpose. By increasing productivity, non-developed communes will increase their purchasing power and thus expand the state market. The system will, in this way, contribute to a more balanced development of the entire state.

 

Pooling of Policies

3.2.1         Association of the Policies

 

Generally, the origin of states has rarely had anything to do with democracy. The people have seldom been asked in what country they would have liked to live. The states are the product of the imposition of the needs of autocratic rulers. The solution is not the negation of states because of their non-democratic origin. The exit lies in their maximal democratization.  

 

In present-day states, the parliamentary form of democracy is prevailing. Society accepts it as the most democratic form of ruling society. However, after the performed election of leaders, delegates, or a party, the individual has no impact on setting the rules for collective actions. Delegated members in the parliament carry out an indirect form of democracy that easily declines from the election programs. The present-day state is a more or less closed, authoritative formation that maintains the coordination of alienated social actions by a system of more substantial or lesser pressure. This state produces alienation, autocracy, exploitation, protectionism, nationalism, and destructiveness.  

 

Elements of the politics and economy of capitalism have achieved progress in democracy and economy; however, they cannot develop further and, therefore, impede the development of society. The new method of social behaviour in the commune substitutes for and promotes all elements of politics and the economy of capitalism, thus allowing the continuation of political and economic prosperity.

 

One should hope that this book will be of interest to some foundations, state leadership, political parties, associations, and individuals who would not regret their contribution to the development of socialism. Naturally, the socialist system will require comprehensive scientific analysis and a theoretical simulation of the commune. Then, when satisfactory results are established, it is possible to experimentally apply the socialist system in a smaller social community that would accept such a system.  

 

***

 

The commune is a part of the state as a sovereign social organization. The commune’s delegates in the state assembly represent the interests of their respective communes. In this way, each commune makes state decisions in creating the country’s external and internal policy and defence of the country. The commune alone defines its internal affairs. Nevertheless, each commune is sovereign enough to enact its laws and regulations on its territory if they are not in collision with the accepted constitutional laws of the state. 

   

The socialist commune will have a closed labour market concerning the state and an independent economy. The workers from the capitalist world will not be able to freely apply for jobs in the commune with the socialist system. They cannot realize income in the socialist commune if they do not have past labour points. Transfer of workers may be allowed administratively if a worker in their commune sells their property and thus gathers a sufficient quantity of money to buy past labour points in the socialist commune. Such workers will also be unfavourable because they cannot be compensated for their participation in building collective ownership of their commune. Therefore, they would have a lower income than the worker who has realized equally valuable past labour in the new commune. The transfer of workers from one commune to another will be accessible only if communes establish an equal system. Then the organization of work would be performed on the level of associated communes. Regulation of the transfer of the value deriving from past labour would be then carried out automatically.

 

The socialist system will ensure the commune’s economic, social, and political stability. It would allow the commune to develop faster and more stable than capitalism in all fields. This also means the people would be reaching more remarkable social advantages than in capitalism. When socialism shows positive results, it may serve as a model to other communes. Then political parties of other communes will accept socialism, contributing to disseminating socialism worldwide.  

 

Accepting socialism by several communes opens up a higher degree of association among the communes based on implementing a new political and economic system. In this way, the commune keeps a part of its political and economic sovereignty and transfers a portion onto the association of communes. The association will be based on the collective labour market and collective capital. Such an association may bring direct conveniences and inconveniences to the commune’s population.  

 

Conveniences would manifest in a free choice of labour in associated communes. In this way, there would be a higher probability of finding a job in which a worker is interested and finding a suitable residence and, consequently, realizing significant conveniences. Further, associated communes are economically more potent. They are thus able to achieve higher prosperity in society and greater certainty in business operation in the case of disruptions in the market.  

 

For the same reasons, the population may also experience the association of communes unfavourably. Namely, a more significant number of workers create a more substantial work competition, and it may result in more difficulty in exercising the right to work in one’s interest. Moreover, greater economic system stability will inevitably require a spillover of money between the communes for income, collective spending and economic development needs. The population may assess such a redistribution of money as unfavourable.  

 

In this regard, the assemblies of the communes wishing to unite will form a program that will clearly define the modalities and procedure of the association. Such a program should be adopted with at least 2/3 of the votes of political parties in the assemblies of communes that want to unite. Naturally, such decisions will not be easily or quickly implemented, which is acceptable because society needs time to adapt to significant changes.

 

As the association of communes can bring benefits and inconveniences to the inhabitants, it must be carried out by the democratic vote of the population through a referendum. The association of communes is an act that significantly affects social action, so a substantial majority of the people should accept it. Let it be at least 2/3 of the votes cast and at least 1/2 of the total population of each commune. After the decision of the political parties, it will probably not be difficult to collect a sufficient number of votes of people in the referendum.

 

One should assume that the practice will show over time that the association of the communes brings a larger market that enables greater profits. Communes that would not be willing to associate themselves with other communes would become economically weaker than associated communes. Besides that, a larger-scale association enables higher productivity realized by a stronger work competition and brings more conveniences in operating results. A larger-scale association will result in a greater certainty in doing business in the case of any disruption emerging in the market. A larger-scale association of communes will form a more significant accumulation of collective money, ensuring meeting a larger quantity of people’s needs. A larger-scale association will allow more possibilities for the population to exert direct influence on making decisions of joint interest on the territory of associated communes. A larger-scale association will enable the people to evaluate the actions of any individual in the region of the associated communes. Briefly, a larger-scale association brings more benefits to the community. Therefore, it may be expected that the population of the communes will aspire to such a larger-scale association.  

 

Association can develop to the state level as a sovereign social organization in a particular territory. However, unlike the commune, the state as a completely sovereign social organization enacts the constituent and other laws of the country. The adoption and amendments to the constitutive and other basic laws are prepared and determined by the state parliament with its expert services. Fundamental rules and decisions regulate the rights and duties of citizens and relations in production and distribution. Delegates in the state parliament should adopt important state laws with at least 2/3 of the deputies’ votes and then forward them to the population in a referendum. Less critical laws, regulations and decisions covering specific activities and not being of general interest to the people are accepted if they receive a majority vote of the delegates or representatives in the state’s parliament.  

 

The population declares itself through computer applications over the Internet by accepting or rejecting such laws. Laws that receive at least 2/3 of the residents who voted and are taken by at least 1/2 of the state’s total population would be passed, and the rest would be rejected or revised. Such adoption of the law should not be problematic if political parties in the state parliament have previously done it. As the population directly decides on its laws, it is interested in knowing them and accepting them of its own free will. Therefore, they are no longer alienated from society.

 

***

 

The democratic approach to the association of the communes also requires freedom of disassociation and limited mutual links. Today, there are no international rules governing the secession of parts of the states. The right to secession should be equal to the freedom of association. Every republic, province and even the smallest territorial community of people, in this case, a commune, should have the right to self-determination. Such a decision should be made by at least 2/3 of the representatives’ votes in the commune assembly in the same way it adopts its association. Then the decision is adopted or rejected by the commune inhabitants with at least 2/3 of the votes of people who participated in the, and at least 50% of the voices of the total number of commune inhabitants.

 

If a referendum in the commune would confirm the will of the people for self-determination, then representatives of the commune and state would engage in the division of assets and liabilities, division of the collectively acquired goods of the commune and the state, including regulation of all obligations, claims and the newly established relations. Based on the agreement achieved, a referendum would need to be organized on the territory of the entire state. 

 

Established disassociation would be accepted if it were in the interest of at least half of the total number of inhabitants of the state. Since the commune has the right to self-determination, the state also needs to have the right to self-determination that can prevent the secession of the commune. The process of disassociation cannot be easy because the enormous number of ties between and among communes, companies, and inhabitants created from the establishment of the state should be considered.  

 

An objective analysis can assume that the population will reject disintegration processes through their practice because they cannot bring greater economic or social benefits. Significant benefits and benefits generally arise from the integration process. An integrated state in socialism can function better than a commune. It will bring more benefits to society than the commune can because it gives more freedom of choice, more power to the people, and more productivity and stability to the economy.

 

More associated people will have more power to develop objective values and thus demystify authorities and overcome the alienation they have imposed. Less alienated people create less problems and are less aggressive. Of course, conflicts among individuals still might be possible; however, nobody will be able to raise disputes among individuals to a social or national level, as democratic anarchy will sanction such attempts. And because the progressive orientation offered by socialism will not produce followers who would support them.

 

Banski Dvori

DNEVNIK


vesna – Pon, 08/10/2007 – 19:47


Zagreb, 7.10.1991. Banski dvori, Svecana dvorana 14.50 sati

U dvorani su na rucku Predsjednik RH Franjo Tudman, predsjednik savezne vlade SFRJ Ante Markovic i Predsjednik Predsjedništva SFRJ Stipe Mesic, savjetnici Predsjednika Tudmana Mario Nobilo i Vesna Škare Ožbolt, procelnik vojnog kabineta Stjepan Adanic i tajnica predsjednika Zdravka Bušic. Razgovara se o teškoj situaciji u Hrvatskoj, o odlukama Predsjedništva SFRJ i o onome što radi Miloševic i vojni vrh JNA.


Rucak je pri kraju. Treba se servirati kava. U tom trenutku Tudman naglo prekida Markovica koji je govorio i predlaže da popiju kavu kod njega u kabinetu. Nobilo i ja se pogledamo. Nikada do sada Tudman to nije napravio – da se nakon rucka vraca u svoj kabinet. Bio je covjek rutine. Svaki dan radni rucak sa suradnicima zapocinjao je tocno u 13.30 i završio bi do 14.50. Tudman bi odlazio u svoju sobu za odmor gdje bi slušao vijesti na radiju u 15 sati. To nikada nije propuštao. Sada odjednom ovakav iskorak. Svi se dižemo i zajedno odlazimo do Tudmanovog kabineta, Nobilo i ja se pozdravljamo s Mesicem i Markovicem i odlazimo do naše tajnice Nade koja nas je nestrpljivo cekala s brojnim porukama. Ušli smo u njenu sobu. Za stolom je sjedila Mirna prevoditeljica koja je na telefonu razgovarala o usvojenju djeteta. Pitala je nekoga s druge strane da li je djecak ili djevojcica. Mario, Nada i ja pretvorili smo se u uho cekajuci odgovor. Odjednom smo umjesto odgovora zaculi snažni zvuk koji je postajao sve glasniji i bliži, kao kad mlazni avion polijece. Eksplozija. Poletjela sam kroz zrak i tresnula u vrata. Soba je bila puna dima. Brzo sam se pridigla, bila sam zbijena u prostor izmedu duplih vrata. Svi smo bili živi. Pojurila sam prema Predsjednikovoj sobi. Tudman mi je viknuo idite prema skloništu.

Tada sam prvi puta u skloništu Banskih dvora. Dvije sobe, telefon, televizor. Unutra je vec bilo puno ljudi. Tudman je vec razgovarao s nekim na telefon. Da ovo je bila raketa, napadnuti smo, cula sam ga kako govori na svom lošem engleskom.


Televizor je zacudo radio. Na TV-u je bio znak opce opasnosti za Zagreb. Odjednom se pojavila napisana vijest, velika skupina aviona digla se s aerodroma na Udbini i leti prema Zagrebu. Odlucili su nas ubiti, pomislila sam. Za to vrijeme Tudman je razgovarao sa Gensherom i Van den Brookom. Rekao im je da smo napadnuti. Bili su to trenuci šutnje i cekanja. Cekali smo novi udar. Jedino je televizor bio glasan. Odjednom vijest – grupa aviona koja je letjela prema Zagrebu vratila se na Udbinu. Jupiii!. Tko nas je spasio? Kasnije sam saznala. Digli su se avioni Sjevernoatlanskog saveza iz Aviana i zaprijetili JNA ako budu nastaviti napadati Zagreb da ce se umiješati. Tudmana, Markovica i Mesica odvode u drugo tajno sklonište, a mi se razilazimo.Meni nešto ne da mira, vracam se gore prema našim kabinetima. Dvorana u kojoj smo rucali bila je razrušena. Nema ni Tudmanove sobe za odmor. Tudmanov kabinet nije jako oštecen, ali sva stakla su porazbijana. Sef je izletio iz sjedišta i blokirao vrata. Odlazim u svoju sobu. Na mom stolu i u mojoj stolici zabijene velike krhotine stakla. Da sam tu sjedila kao obicno i slušala vijesti, sada bi bila mrtva sasjecena. Stakla je bilo svugdje zabijenog u zidove i slike. Nešto je cudno, niti jedno ogledalo u Banskim dvorima nije puklo.


Taj dan kada su raketirani Banski dvori nitko nije bio na svom mjestu. Zahvaljujuci jednoj iznenadnoj odluci o kavi u Banskim dvorima nije bilo mrtvih niti ranjenih. Dok sam tako gledala ruševine pomislila sam: Ovdje su sjedila tri Hrvata koja su tada odredivala sudbinu Jugoslavije – Markovic i Mesic i Tudman. Sva trojica trebala su biti ubijena jednim potezom, jednom precizno poslanom raketom. Mislim da je bila navodena i to iz Banskih dvora. Previše je precizno pogodila. Uh, kada bi pocela nabrajati tko baš taj dan nije bio na poslu dode mi zlo. Dugo, dugo nakon toga u ušima mi je bio zvuk rakete koja je pala na nas.


Tu vecer nakon dogadaja koji nam je promijenio život Predsjednik Tudman je u televizijskom intervjuu izjavio kako osuduje srpski terorizam, ali da Hrvatsku na svome putu do suverenosti i neovisnosti ne mogu sprijeciti ni zlocini niti žrtve. Hrvatska bi nastavila živjeti i bez mene, a sad ce sa mnom živjeti u slobodi.


Odluka o raskidu svih državnopravnih veza s bivšom SFRJ donesena je sutradan u podrumskoj dvorani Ine u Šubicevoj, 8. listopada 1991. godine. Na današnji dan 8.10.1991. Hrvatski sabor proglasio je neovisnost!