This is a response to James Sun’s blog post on conflict diamonds.
How far are people willing to go to pay a lower price? Are we willing to sacrifice the lives and working conditions of others just so that we can benefit from them? Is it alright for us to be ignorant when we really know what happens every time we decide to purchase a diamond ring for a lower premium?
However, businesses don’t care. As Friedman stated, the goal of every company is to maximize profit whether or not we realize it, and without it, companies won’t be able to operate. Such incentives are understandable, CEOs will do whatever they have to do in order to keep their business alive. Instead, I think that it is up to the consumer to send a message to the people running the business that we know what they’re doing, that we know it’s wrong, and that we don’t want diamonds if it comes from those circumstances. Since Freeman believes that “it is important to align all the stakeholder’s general interests towards one common goal”, with the consumers being a large stakeholder, the companies will be forced to change their ways.
I am glad that people are becoming more educated behind the “Conflict Diamond” issue, and that large companies such as Tiffany and Co. are moving away from selling blood diamonds and considering the ethics behind it. I believe since that more people are aware and unsettled by the circumstances of the blood diamond, it was a smart move for Tiffany and Co. to publicly ensure that their diamonds are “socially and environmentally ethical”. In addition, the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme is another precautionary action to prevent the entrance of blood diamonds in the diamond market.