fbpx
Preps and Solutions
(Sponsored Ads)
Silver
Recently Posted Articles and Videos
Ready Nutrition - Homesteading and Preparedness
Ready Gardens - A Ready Nutrition Company
SGT Report
The Daily Sheeple
The Prepper Website
The Daily Coin
Strategic Relocation
top Prepper Web Sites
Featured Destinations
The Liberty Mill
Web Destinations

Clarocet for Kids

Are Gun Rights the Next Target of Corporate Censorship?

José Niño
January 4th, 2019
Mises Institute
Comments (47)
Read by 3,330 people
THC-free CBD Formula - Zero High Brand

This article was originally published by José Niño at the Mises Institute

Ever since Dick’s Sporting Goods and banks such as Citigroup made business decisions in line with the mainstream media’s push for gun control, some opponents of gun control have debated whether private companies pose a bigger threat to gun rights than government does. In the case of Dick’s Sporting Goods, the outdoor company decided to stop selling rifles like the AR-15 and banned the sale of firearms to individuals younger than 21. In response to the Parkland shooting in Florida, banks like Citigroup also crafted their own anti-gun policies as reported in The New York Times:

Citigroup is setting restrictions on the sale of firearms by its business customers, making it the first Wall Street bank to take a stance in the divisive nationwide gun control debate.

The new policy, announced Thursday, prohibits the sale of firearms to customers who have not passed a background check or who are younger than 21. It also bars the sale of bump stocks and high-capacity magazines.

It’s not just gun owners who are experiencing limited shopping choices. Gun rights lobbies like the National Rifle Association have faced opposition from corporate America. Rental car companies like Avis and software companies like Symantec have severed their affiliate programs with the NRA in the wake of the Parkland shooting hysteria.

It appears the next fad in virtue signaling in the corporate world may be gun control gun.

Why More Laws are Not the Answer

US Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana recently filed the No Red and Blue Banks Act that would “prohibit the federal government from giving contracts to banks that discriminate against lawful businesses based solely on social policy considerations.” Kennedy does raise a valid point about how the government should put the brakes on business subsidization.

Unfortunately, Kennedy falls for the modern-day conservative trap of attacking government contracts because they benefit corporations who espouse leftist causes, rather than categorically opposing all forms of government intervention. For starters, all state contracts and privileges to businesses should be cut off, regardless of their stated goal or purpose. However, many well-intentioned conservatives are stuck on myopic thinking and fail to notice the implicit state coercion in the background. For them, ironically, more government is the answer.

Thinking Beyond Stage 1

Most people see the capitalistic façade of the US economy, but they don’t recognize the implicit threats of state force. Corporations these days are trying to beat the government to the punch when it comes to disassociating with politically maligned groups like gun owners.

If corporations continue to lag, they’ll receive veiled threats from the government to either ban these businesses or else have laws slapped on them. This was on display with the latest social de-platforming scandal.

Justin Raimondo detailed Senator Chris Murphy’s threats to social media companies during the de-platforming mania:

All this wasn’t good enough for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut), who demanded to know if the plan was to only take down “one website.” No doubt he has a whole list of sites he’d like to take down. Even more ominously, it was revealed that a direct threat had been made to these companies by Sen. Mark Warner (D-Virginia), who sent out a memo listing all the ways the government could crack down on Big Data if they refuse to go along with cleansing the internet of “divisive” material.

In many regards, politically-connected corporation’s decisions to discontinue business with certain political organizations provide cover for control-freak politicians. Instead of having to pass laws themselves, of which they can be held accountable for during election time, politicians can just pressure and even extort a corporation into carrying out their agenda. No controversial laws or regulations necessary — at least for the time being.

It Goes Back to Culture

It would be naïve to believe that these forms of dissociation and censorship are going to be confined to the private sector. At the end of the day, politics is downstream from culture.

What we’re seeing now is a manifestation of this degenerative process — in real time.

No matter what the naysayers claim, political correctness and state-linguistic complex are tools of the political establishment in its campaign to legitimize political universalism. Once businesses embrace state-linguistic complex hook, line and sinker, this same behavior will then permeate to other parts of society. The political realm will eventually be one of the last sectors to embrace these trends. This has become apparent with the incoming Congress, which is already proposing a slew of gun control bills ranging from universal gun registration to red flag gun confiscation schemes.

America Needs De-Politicization

Yes, business decisions to disassociate with gun groups are not qualitatively the same as state-based gun control. In fact, state-imposed gun control is heavy-handed and much harder to repeal due to institutional inertia in government. Think about it: when was the last time we saw any meaningful legislation repealed at the federal level?

In the long-term, gun organizations can at least turn to other banks and service providers for their daily operations. In some cases, certain entities will emerge to serve the needs of niche organizations that find themselves ostracized by legacy institutions. The controversial social media outlet Gab comes to mind.

Other alternatives such as seeking legal remedies through the courts could be valid options for those affected by controversial business decisions. Plaintiffs could cite breach of contract actions such as violations of terms of service or defamation of character should they decide to take these companies to court. One thing is certain: adding more bureaucracy is not the answer in fighting corporate America’s political correctness agenda.

America desperately needs a political detox, and decentralization might just provide the cure.

***

Jose Nino is a Venezuelan-American political activist based in Fort Collins, Colorado. Contact: twitter or email him here.

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.
CBD Oils, Isolates, Supplements And Information
Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Author: José Niño
Views: Read by 3,330 people
Date: January 4th, 2019
Website: https://mises.org/

Copyright Information: This content has been contributed to SHTFplan by a third-party or has been republished with permission from the author. Please contact the author directly for republishing information.

47 Comments...

Vote: Click here to vote for SHTF Plan as a Top Prepper Web Site
  1. Anonymous says:

    Nothing can be done to stop this other than taking your dealings elsewhere when someone you’re doing business with makes a move opposing gun rights and gun transactions.

    Don’t expect that to make much difference, there aren’t enough gun owners and 2nd amendment supporters that will take that move to have any influence in the matter.

  2. 🇺🇸⭐️⭐️🇺🇸 News article commonsenseevaluation “FBI Data Shows Armed Citizens Have 94% Success rate Stopping Would be Mass Shooters”
    News article Sun Sentinel “Two decades after Columbine and five years after Sandy Hook, educators and police still weren’t ready for Parkland.”
    We are not in a civil war, we are in the midst of a communist style overthrow of America. Spread the word. News article:
    Never Give Up Your Guns

  3. rellik says:

    Think about where most corporations Hq’s are. Big cities or blue states. Most corporations frankly think they can “blow off” gun owners. They don’t care about their businesses losses due to being boycotted by disaffected gun owners. They think that we have to deal with these corporations as we have no other choice.
    Amazon, Paypal, UPS, various banks et al arrogantly believe they can discriminate as they please, indeed they can and do.
    So what do we do about it? We are still at the ballot box stage, but we are losing there and will continue to do so. Democrats are the majority and are way to the left side of the intelligence bell curve. We can’t/won’t go “Toe to Toe” with the police and military forces. Nobody has taken up the idea/planing/effort required for the assassination of selected people in seats of power and influence. A tactic proven to work.
    We are losing because we are playing by their rules. Make your preparations. I’m not going to bother to try to save “Blue” America, I’m just going to work on saving people worth saving.

    • The Deplorable Renegade says:

      Rellik, agreed about corporations. There scum anyway because they prefer to hire foreigners who will work for less than able-bodied Americans. And who ever said BLUE America is WORTH saving? Let them find out the HARD way what socialism is REALLY like. They made their own bed so they can go lay their stupid asses down on it.

    • Son of patriot says:

      Then as Patriots we should patronize those stores that are the mom and pops, not just another franchise of a mega corporation. I have been from one end of this country to another and the same stores are everywhere. All I’m saying is patronize the Cabellas and bass pros, not Dicks sporting goods. That place will never get a nickle from me.

      • The Deplorable Renegade says:

        Son of patriot, good points. Bass Pro and Cabellas have merged. I always go there for ammo, gun cleaning supplies, etc. Always get good service there too I’ve even bought 2 guns from them in the past. I’ve been boycotting DICKHEAD sporting goods ever since they stopped selling the ARs and that was right after SANDY HOOK NOT PARKLAND. They never had a decent selection of anything anyway.

  4. Menzoberranzan says:

    Don’t buy from these big chain stores. They are fucking scum. Buy from individuals. If you must have a new one, get it from a small local gun store where the money stays in your county with your local small businessman.

  5. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    Menzo, agreed. I stay out of the ‘big box’ stores all I can. I go to locally-owned businesses all I can for everything I need. No one tells me what I can or can’t have. Gun show in my area this weekend. Gotta stock up on more ammo and see what other ‘goodies’ I can get, LOL.

  6. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    Over at The Daily Sheeple check out “Impeach The Motherf*cker”; Democratic Lawmaker Goes After Trump On Her First Day In Office”. I threw up a snack I had just watching the muslim bitch’s video.

  7. Maranatha says:

    They can kiss my behind. Would you let a bank tell you what church to attend, what candidate to vote for, what restaurant to support, what drug to take, what person to date and marry?

    Any bank so obnoxious should lose their customers.

  8. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    Maranatha, AMEN to your comments. There’s something to be said for making your own decisions.

  9. beerman says:

    Never been to Dicks, and sures the **** wont now. Or anyone else that pulls this crap. **** corporate commiemerica.

  10. Sheep Dog says:

    I vote with my wallet everyday.

  11. Anonymous says:

    I bet the CEO has quite an arsenal.

  12. Anonymous says:

    That’s what happens when you depend on your enemy’s form of weaponry and ammunition and his narrow range of tactics to accommodate that. The Iroquois were lulled into such a dependence on white man’s weaponry and other contrivances of the whites, having been equipped by the white man with guns and were thus dependent on the ammunition that white man also supplied them that supposedly made the Iroquois “superior” to the Shawnee, et al, who’s Ohio Country the whites wanted for themselves. The Beaver Wars ensued, with the Shawnee conveniently fleeing from the “boom” and the quick lethality of what shots did hit the vital parts of some of them that they had been unaccustomed to before. That rout by the Shawnee and the other Native occupants emptied the Ohio Country for the whites to then take, after the whites could cut off the Iroquois’ gunpowder supply and make the Iroquois’ and other Natives’ guns worthless to depend on to defend them against the whites. By then, though, the Native culture of archery had largely been abandoned by them, owing to their adopted love of the presumed power of the noise and what incidental power of injury to their targets that single-shot muskets meant for them during the Beaver Wars. Most of guns’ power, however, is only psychological–from the noise they make. The U.S. Department of Defense claims that it took 50,000 wasted shots from fully-automatic fire to hit any target once during the Vietnam War. Much of what musket volleys shot, though comparable in intent to modern fully-automatic gunshots when musketry is applied with regimental discipline, was also wasted as misses; and, at ranges often less than that of even 50 lb. flight archery whose ammunition is recoverable and re-usable! Yet, the love of firearms is what enthralls Americans to them, just like their love of cars, trucks and planes. Their resultant enslavement to those on whom they depend–and who rule over them by their enslavement to them–is precisely why and how the current elites rule over their dependents, like the proverbial “luring of a child by candy”.

    • Maranatha says:

      The Native Americans being so isolated from other cultures far different from them thus never developed better archery technology. Their bows were crude and strictly short range. The advantage was guerilla tactics and faster relading time.

      Now the protoKoreans (Joseon) had water buffalo and used theirhorns to make very accurate and long range short bows. The Mongols had horse tactics and short bows that were devastating to even European tactics who had advanced Gothic armor in places like Germany.

      The short bow can be remarkably effective. Crossbows were considered weapons of mass destruction in the first crusade due to ease of training, lethality, but were horrendously slow and of little value on horseback due to an inability to footcrank them.

      It’s also a resolve, morale, and tactics issue as the Apache were terrific guerilla fighters.

      • Maranatha says:

        ht tps://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/military-history/geronimo-ruthless-apache-chief/
        More military history.

        Early firearms had no rifling (the slow corkscrew pattern which the spins the projectile) or had crude rifling or there were issues with the load being inconsistent in terms of strength and acceleration. A heavy reliance on training militia versus an ability to have professional soldiers led to inconsistency in accuracy and resolve.

        It was fairly common for militia and raw recruits to feel bad about shooting the enemy and even miss on purpose based on reading old journal entries even during the civil war.

        The Apache had no such issues firing their rifles.

      • Maranatha says:

        ht tps://www.historyonthenet.com/what-made-the-mongol-army-so-successful
        Again the Mongol bow was a horn-based short compound bow thus could be drawn and fired repeatedly with high accuracy and range, mounted or unmounted, thus was a devastating weapon versus European technology.

        It would be hundreds of years later before cavalry had such dependable firearm technology.

        There is nothing wrong with archery as a prepper weapon for guerilla tactics.

  13. Asshat says:

    Dicks pissed me off one Black Friday when 22lr was in short supply. They had Remington golden bullet bricks 525 rnds for $19.99 so I went there with my son 10yrs old at the time. They had a 1 box per cust rule because there was people going around buying up all the 22 and reselling it on line which is their right imo. Well I wanted 2 boxes one for me and 1 for my little guy but obviously I’d be making the purchase cus a ten year old cannot buy ammo. The guy says you can’t do that I said why my son is a customer isn’t he they said no. So fuck them and the horse they rode in on. I haven’t been back since. Not playing their games. I wasn’t being greedy and even if I was they don’t know the golden rule. I should’ve been able to buy every fuckin box if I wanted. This is un American. Rationing is communist shit. Dicks hates gun owners.

  14. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    I made the last comment on this post at 4:08 pm and no one else has commented since? Come on everyone, I know this issue is as near and dear to you as it is to me.

  15. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    Over at Breitbart.com check out “House Democrats To Introduce Bill Criminalizing Private Gun Sales On Tuesday”. The libturds aren’t wasting much time, are they? [SARCASM] And guess who one of the co-sponsors is? [DRUM ROLL] Nazi Pelosi herself, Speaker Of The House AGAIN! Oh well, she did say they were pushing new gun control legislation AGAIN.

    • Dead Meat says:

      “The bill seeks to put background checks in place for all gun sales, requiring a daughter to get a background check before her mother can give her a gun or a son to get a background check before a father can give him one. It would also require a lifelong friend to get a background check before he can a gun from his lifelong friend.”

      And how the hell could they enforce this unless they also want to push “registration”
      Fuck ’em!

      • The Deplorable Renegade says:

        Dead Meat, agreed. Another useless law that won’t prevent any incidents. I won’t follow it either.

      • Anonymous says:

        If you live in a background check State then there is an initial record of its sale to you.

        Unless you have transferred it through a background check to someone else, you better be willing to claim whoever gets caught with it (if they do) stole it or bought it illegally from someone who did or it would be self evident that you transferred it to them.

        Don’t think people won’t rat each other out (in both directions) when they’re looking at a prison sentence if they don’t.

    • grandee says:

      I was reminded the other day of this. I’d forgotten…

      that Pelosi is third in line for POTUS if…

      such is our lives now.

      prep on and prep your souls

  16. TommyD says:

    i think after the next fake school shooting, the Congress will pass federal gun control of some sort and Trump will sign it. I notice in the comments that Gun rights people sound scared. And i cant blame them.

  17. Maranatha says:

    8Au6qBLgk1A
    What the World Needs is a Few More Rednecks by Charlie Daniels.

    You know there aren’t many minorities in Kentucky, but a lot of them are rednecks in the rural areas regardless of color. That’s what I like about it.

    Only a fool would try to ban private firearm sales in Kentucky because every redneck would get perturbed and set ’em straight.

  18. Maranatha says:

    uWw-daA1BxM
    Kentucky Sheriff will defy illegal federal gun control laws.

  19. Gestor says:

    So I thought… better see whats up with mises.org and immediately pizzed off Why should SPLC have a dam thing to say about Austrian Economics website?
    Then after reading Senor Niño’ s view on Venezuela’s economic woes have totally lost my train of thought.
    I hear there’s a herbal remedy for that.

  20. Quatermain says:

    The cash only model certainly seems to work for the legal pot trade. I would submit that there are advantages to treating all firearms purchases as cash on the barrel head transactions; Privacy being one. The other would be boycotting the banks entirely. Not that I agree with what is being done, just looking for the silver lining and a way to fight back.

  21. Abaddon says:

    I try to track businesses that follow a so called social conscience or supports a socialist politically correct policy. As long as it is feasible, I never give any of these companies/businesses my business. I have well over 100 on that list at present and it just seems to keep growing. I don’t think things are going to get better any time soon, only worse. I am one of those that hopes for a SHTF scenario(nonnuclear though) to take place and take us back to a simpler way of life with fewer leftists/socialists around telling us how we should live and think. I guess I am just a selfish dreamer though.

  22. Romeo Charlie says:

    Unfortunately new gun owners will decline in the same way new cigarette smokers have over the years. In the 1920-70’s smoking in public was common and excepted. However once the media put it in their crosshairs by demonizing it it became unpopular and banned in most places even though cigarettes are legal to buy. There will be those of us that own firearms and see the need to protect the 2A but as social pressures, attitudes and influences such as the media and Facebook demonize it that percentage of the population will decrease and gun owners will become a small minority just like smokers are today.

    The current generation is being mentally prepared to be placed in the bondages of communism. They are embracing it today and will not realize the horrific mistake they have made until it’s too late.

  23. Maranatha says:

    ht tps://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/man-sells-junk-guns-to-buy-back-program-buys-new-gun-with-cash/
    Over the years, proponents of Second Amendment have toyed with and mocked these buy back programs. Since there typically are “no questions asked” and stated prices for buy back, then they made junk firearms (functional or nonfunctional) and then made their own press releases to certain pro Second Amendment sites to publically ridicule them.

    The link abve is one such example. He made zip guns and do-it-yourself shotguns out of junk, sold them to the ridiculous buy back program, then bought actual firearms with the proceeds.

    In the past, some have just waited for sheriff sales of seized firearms, then bought them back as well.

    If everyone started toying with them, we could use this as a way to shut them down as these lose money besides making them look like laughstocks.

  24. Jim in Va. says:

    These bills won’t pass the Senate and the prez won’t sign them. time to gear up though because some states are going nuts on new bills too.

    • Mountain Trekker says:

      Don’t bet on that Jim. There is more than one RINO in the Senate. Rubio is backing a Red Flag Bill so now with the Dems. in control of the House all it would take is one more big shooting spree and you will be surprised how many So-Called Republicans will vote in favor of some kind of gun control. Trekker Out

  25. Read the comments made here with much interest. What I noticed is that not one knew that the Bill of Rights requires those who serve within our governments to PROTECT the people’s natural rights. The Bill of Rights list specific prohibitions on governmental power, in response to calls from the several states for greater constitutional protection for individual liberties. It does NOT delegate any authority to the governments except in certain cases, and then the solution ALLOWED is also found in writing.

    Example of this is the 4th Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

    What does it require of those who serve within our governments to do ALWAYS if a violation requires a search?

    It requires a REASONABLE search (and seizures) as defined within the 4th Amendment:
    — With a WARRANT;
    — Based upon PROBABLE CAUSE;
    — Subject to DUE PROCESS REVIEW (Oath or Affirmation);
    — Particularly describing the PLACE to be search, AND
    — Particularly describing the PERSONS or THINGS to be seized.

    Clearly 5 things are required as indicated by the word “AND”. There cannot be 4 out of 5 or 3 out of 5 and still have a reasonable and Lawful search and seizure.

    2nd Amendment: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    The words “shall not be infringed” means not ever. There is NO authority delegated for those to decide what. when, how, what type, etc of arms the American people keep/use/etc. When a crime is committed, then they may take the weapon from that person UNTIL they paid for that crime(s). Once their time/etc is done, every single right the US Constitution requires those who serve within our governments to PROTECT for the people is once again available to that person LAWFULLY.

    http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary
    WARRANT, verb transitive [The primary sense of the root is to stop or hold, or to repel, and thus guard by resisting danger; as we say, to keep off. Hence the sense of security. See Guard and Garrison.]
    1. To authorize; to give authority or power to do or forbear any thing, by which the person authorized is secured or saved harmless from any loss or damage by the act.
    2. To maintain; to support by authority or proof.
    3. To justify. …
    WARRANT, noun
    1. An act, instrument or obligation, by which one person authorizes another to do something which he has not otherwise a right to do; an act or instrument investing one with a right or authority, and thus securing him from loss or damage; a word of general application.
    2. A precept authorizing an officer to seize an offender and bring him to justice. A general warrant to seize suspected persons, is illegal. …

    INFRINGE, verb transitive infrinj’. [Latin infringo; in and frango, to break. See Break.]
    1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done.
    2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law.
    3. To destroy or hinder; as, to infringe efficacy. [Little used.]

    The Preamble to the Bill of Rights makes that clear.
    Preamble to the Bill of Rights: Congress OF THE United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the Fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
    THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

    PRE’AMBLE, noun [Latin proe, before, and ambulo, to go.]
    1. Something previous; introduction to a discourse or writing.
    2. The introductory part of a statute, which states the reasons and intent of the law.

  26. The Deplorable Renegade says:

    Jim, good points. I went to a gun show today and restocked on ammo and a few accessories. Everyone get everything while you can. 2019 is already shaping up to be an “interesting” year.

  27. https://www.midsouthshooterssupply.com/

    https://palmettostatearmory.com/ PSA

    2 of the better firearms e-tailers.

    PSA sometimes has Federal XM193 (5.56) on sale for 27 cents a round.

    e.g. for a 308, one option is to use the PSA AR10 lower, and the DPMS 24″ upper.

    https://www.midwayusa.com/product/222548/dpms-gii-b24-upper-receiver-assembly-308-winchester-24-barrel

  28. Beaumont says:

    Anyone practicing radical Republicanism, aka Reconstruction, is not a conservative.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321096/Gun-companies-target-women-pink-firearms-NRA-convention.html

    https://www.salon.com/2013/03/03/the_nras_flip_flop_on_african_americans/

    When I hear about your affiliates, all I can imagine is the laundering of subsidies.

    SJW panderers aren’t competitive. Sorry. Didn’t happen.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Commenting Policy:

Some comments on this web site are automatically moderated through our Spam protection systems. Please be patient if your comment isn't immediately available. We're not trying to censor you, the system just wants to make sure you're not a robot posting random spam.

This web site thrives because of its community. While we support lively debates and understand that people get excited, frustrated or angry at times, we ask that the conversation remain civil. Racism, to include any religious affiliation, will not be tolerated on this site, including the disparagement of people in the comments section.

 
THC-free CBD Formula - Zero High Brand

Web Design and Content Copyright 2007 - 2015 SHTF Plan - When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You - All Rights Reserved

Our Supercharged Intel Xeon E5-2620 v4 Octo-Core Dual Servers are Powered By Liquid Web

Dedicated IP Address: 69.167.174.108

The content on this site is provided as general information only. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of sponsors or firms affiliated with the author(s). The author may or may not have a financial interest in any company or advertiser referenced. Any action taken as a result of information, analysis, or advertisement on this site is ultimately the responsibility of the reader.

SHTFplan is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.