The Diamond Industry Is Unethical

Diamonds Aren’t Forever
Around the world, especially in the United States, it has become an accepted cultural norm that any marriage proposal must include a diamond. However, many people are oblivious to the history behind the exchange of rings and the diamonds they include. The desire for couples to represent their love for one another with a diamond ring unintentionally promotes corruption on many levels. Not only are these diamonds the product of a business with unethical and immoral beginnings, but also, their alleged significance is a fiction created by these diamond businesses. The history of the diamond industry is overflowing with immoral deals and exploitation. In addition to concern about the history, consumers should have trepidations

Historically, diamonds have always been perceived as rare; they only “became readily available” in the last century (Rosen). However, as diamond production rose from under one million carats in the 1870s to three million carats in the 1920s, the De Beers Diamond Company sought to perpetuate the illusion that diamonds were scarce (Shenigo; “Diamonds History and Lore”). By strategically aligning with other diamond companies, De Beers, now known as the “De Beers diamond cartel,” was able to fabricate a perceived scarcity of diamonds (Goldschein; Benson). The company “released only enough rough diamonds to satisfy the current demand” (Rosen). To maintain their monopoly, De Beers resorted to extreme measures. For example, Goldschein reports after the discovery of diamonds in Serbia in the 1950s, the company purchased all diamonds produced from the mines. Additionally, as a method of controlling diamond production in Botswana, De Beers gave the government a fifteen percent stake in the company. When producers like Zaire and Israel revolted, De Beers suppressed their efforts by “releasing stockpiles of diamonds similar to that country’s product, driving down demand” (Goldschein). Even today, the De Beers company has managed to maintain an impressive hold over the diamond supply by making deals with countries like Russia, Australia, and Canada (Rosen). Not only do have De Beer’s methods negatively impacted retailers and distributers, they also influence the