Flicker Fusion

There’s no such thing as a socially conscious diamond

Buzzfeed this morning had a collection of articles talking about a new-ish trend of so-called “socially conscious diamonds”. This is something I’ve been passively interested in ever since the idea of man-made diamonds was a Wired cover story four years ago, but now celebrities are getting in on the game. Because it just wouldn’t be right for Angelina Jolie to walk down the red carpet draped in conflict diamonds from her beloved, adoptive continent du jour.

The problem, of course, is that the idea of social consciousness in the diamond industry is completely absurd. Many have written about the corrupt, malfeasant diamond cartel (Anil Dash has an excellent collection of posts that coincided with his purchase of a diamond-free engagement ring). The definitive tome on the subject, though, comes from Edward Jay Epstein (who more recently has focused on another wholly corrupt cartel, the movie industry) in an article he penned for the Atlantic over 25 years ago, “Have you ever tried to resell a diamond?”.

Epstein explores not just the environmental and human toll exacted by the De Beers cartel on the third world but the psychological damage that they have inflicted on the first world. In short, over the course of a mere few decades, De Beers managed to convince an entire generation that diamonds were not just a rare symbol of endless adoration (patently false, as diamonds quite literally litter the earth) but the only true way to express your love. Every year, millions of wide-eyed young men shell out two months salary on a practically worthless carbon rock because the object of their affections has been conditioned to expect such baubles by an utterly corrupt corporation.

If Gwenyth and Angelina really want to do something socially conscious, they’ll give up the diamonds entirely and perhaps help to finally end the short, lucrative grip on our imaginations.