The leading Scottish crime writer Denise Mina has explained why she is voting No in tomorrow's Independence Referendum.
In a piece for Radio Four's Today programme, Mina says that independence is a "conceptual mistake."
She added: "We live in a global environment. The nation state is an irrelevant 17th century construct, and the autonomous nation state is even more fantastical.
"All countries are bound by a web of international and supranational obligations.
"We would not be autonomous. We would be disadvantaged. Factionalizing can only benefit stateless corporations as we vie to give them the best deal.
"And, in a rapidly warming world, forming a small country, reliant on continued oil production, is in no one's interests, not even our own."
She adds: "Worse: the consequences of a Yes vote are shrouded in mystery. Attempts to anticipate any negatives are dismissed as scaremongering.
"A whole Yes belief system has built up around this: consistent signals from the EU that our membership would not be automatic - don't believe it.
"The rest of the UK tell us they don't want a currency union - don't believe it. Belief is not a plan. Belief is a refusal to discuss."
She writes that a "chorus of outrage is not the same as an agenda...It takes me to Tahria Square and the Arab Spring where there was unanimity about overthrowing Mubarak, but no consensus of agenda.
"The power vacuum was filled with the only group who did have a consensus: the Muslim Brotherhood.
"The factional nature of the yes campaign is very clear: Green Yes, SNP yes, Labour Yes.
"On the upside: the civil revolution means that, whatever the outcome of the referendum, politics will never be the same again."
Another major artist also weighed into the debate today. Douglas Gordon, winner of the Turner Prize, appeared to back a Yes vote.
Via the Twitter feed of fellow artist Roddy Buchanan, he said: "I was in love with a girl, she needed her independence.
"I had to say 'YES'! Now we're best friends."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article