Fuck DeBeers: Outsourcing And Blood Edition
Thanks to the wonders of the global economy,
the majority of all diamonds, mined legitimately or not, now pass through a single city in India. The result is that up to a quarter of all diamonds on the market are blood diamonds. And nobody can tell which are which.
Thanks, globalisation.
The issue is that the polishers in Surat really don't care where their stones are from, and are more than happy to launder stones that come through the city. Nor is anyone in any position to fix the matter. Which brings us back to square one.
So, what can you do? You can try purchasing Canadian diamonds. Or one of the lab-grown diamonds now available, perhaps with a bit of your Lab mixed in.
XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
0
Posts
The societal weight of having to get a diamond for your mate is very strong. So much its sickening really.
The problem is that these diamonds are dug up by slave labor in order to fund civil wars by warlords who use all sorts of unsavory tactics.
Because Debeers keeps the prices high, terrorists, guerrillas, gangsters and militias can mine diamonds using slave labor and acquired funding to keep conflicts going long after they would have collapsed. Since they price is so high, you only need about a suitcase worth of diamonds to make millions. Since its even more profitable to mine something if you don't have to pay the miners, human trafficking ensues, with guerrillas kidnapping people(usually kids) to be miners. That none of this benefits the local community is a given.
Diamonds can only be compared to drugs like cocaine and heroin in how scummy the actors are in acquiring them and how much suffering they cause.
I think in many ways, diamonds are like a brand.
/offtopicover, back to blood diamonds.
Personally I prefer opals, they are far prettier with their shimmer of colors, plus instead of supporting wars, I'm supporting some guy buying beer in a wasteland who is likely named 'Bruce' or something.
Eh. The social obsession with diamonds have priced them so that their mechanical properties, which are quite useful, come with a cost disproportionate with the actual availability of them. So there is that downside to society fixating on them.
Due to their high value and portability, diamonds are not like other resources. You want to plunder a countries oil? You need to build the infrastructure and ensure stability and protect the fixed assets of the wells and pipelines. Warlord gangs can't do that, but they can run a diamond mine that's just a hole in the ground full of slave labour, and the total product will barely fill someones pockets to smuggle out of the country.
Conflict Diamonds are therefore potential much more destablising a source of revenue than other resources, and the demand is mostly due to inflated scarcity and luxury markets in developed nations. Since its a) not a necessity good and b) produces conditions where there are costly social and environmental side effects, why shouldn't people try and stop it?
We're valuing [less fucked up African nations] > [25% savings on diamonds for jewelry].
Edit: Beat
Yes and no. I think that it is really hard to disentangle the status symbol from the actual item because of how ingrained they are in our culture, but when it comes to actually buying one, the sparkle is the main seller. Almost everyone prefers a smaller brilliant stone over a larger stone with a big visible inclusion or which is cloudy and throws off little light, at least in my experience.
Fair enough. Thanks for the information. I'm still going to buy them for my wife though, because she likes them. It seems to me that you'd need to make people stop desiring them as a first step, and that will be difficult. . .
So if the smaller more brilliant stone turned out to be a $20 fake diamond, you'd still buy it over a more expensive real diamond that has less color and clarity?
We can literally solve the problem of buying shiny stones without exploiting native populations, supporting a gigantic monolithic and cruel industry, or fueling warlords, but nope it is somehow not the saaaaaaame.
You can get diamonds made out of the organic matter of your loved ones how is that not much, much better?
But no, DeBeers instead invented a spectroscope so that they could distinguish between artificial and natural diamonds because without looking at the spectrograph they are impossible for even trained professionals to tell apart.
In short, fuck the diamond industry, buy lab-diamonds every day.
Science has solved one of society's ills
I'm awesome.
Well, that has never been the case in my experience. My wife actually has some cz earrings that were around $35 (I won't buy diamond studs because anything of a decent size is insane) and they look ok, but don't have the sparkle of the real thing. But yes, I would buy her what she liked the best. That said, we are talking normal jewelery, not an engagement ring. I would not go fake for an engagement ring under any circumstances. It would feel like a lie to me.
Large-scale public awareness campaigns coupled with information regarding the superiority of synthetic diamonds.
I am legit not kidding.
The US government isn't going to intervene. There's no oil there.
Nobody is saying "don't buy diamonds". We're saying "don't buy blood diamonds". Which means either buying Canadian diamonds (since they are tracked much more closely than the useless Kimberley Process) or buying lab-grown diamonds.
So a shift in public opinion towards synthetic diamonds that will in turn create a market demand for synthetics? I like it. Are synthetics cost competitive at this point?
Your conclusion is faulty because you're ignoring the concepts of branding and authenticity.
Whereas I'd argue it's only a lie if they don't know.
The problem is that even if you personally, and your partner personally, cares and would eater avoid diamonds, that societal pressure still pushes you to buy one for engagement rings...lest your marriage look like a sham.
Those two points go together, don't they? The first goes to lying to your partner, and I agree. But the second is a bit more complex, and goes to what you are saying to society when you wear a stone that you know will fool people. Its similar to using knock off designer things. You give off an impression that does not match the reality, imo.
Edit: to be clear, I don't think this is necessarily that big of a deal, but there is a difference there.
The message you're sending to society is "Your false scarcity is bad and you should feel bad!"
Which are bullshit concepts pushed by DeBeers to preserve their cartel.
If you need help understanding how you should feel about DeBeers, please refer to the thread title.
How is it any fault at all of mine if I'm wearing CZ and someone takes it upon themselves to assume it's a diamond and gets offended when it's not? It's not like wearing a knockoff at all. People are allowed to have jewelry not made out of diamonds. If other people want to get all upset about it then have fun. Just do it somewhere else. It's stupid to pretend that there's only one shiny colorless clear thing that can go in jewelry.
Public awareness campaigns have got to be one of the most useless things out there. There was even that Leonardo DiCaprio movie titled "Blood Diamond" and no one gave a damn.
At this point it's like breast cancer awareness. Who doesn't know about the pink ribbon campaigns and the marathons and the walks and NFL wearing pink? People know, they just don't care.
What's doubly damning is that the atrocities are taking place in Africa, which lots of people already dismiss as being fucked up and irreparable.
That I agree with 100%. I guess my issue is really only if people buy them intending to deceive people. If someone complements your ring, I don't think you need to say "thanks, it's a CZ!" but if someone actually asks (which is rude, of course) then you should be honest.