Also from the link: ...No person shall be accepted as a member of this Order unless he be a white male citizen of the United States of America...
None of us can know for sure. So we traders think in probabilities. Is it more probable that there was racial intent, or not? IMO, it is more likely that the statue was destroyed based on racism; rather than based on a random act.
Whites only requirement was lifted decades ago? 1990s? 1980s? People still think slavery/racism ended in 1864-65
You can be offended all you like. You can protest. You can take legal action. You can boycott and vote your convictions. What you can't do, or at least could not do previously, is take it upon yourself to destroy or remove that which offends you. Again, for the umpteenth time, once a society accepts that behavior the door is open for any and all offenses, real or perceived.
Exactly. Again from the link: ...Until 1973, the national constitution of the Elk lodge restricted membership to white men.[18][19][20] In 1972, the Elks expelled the head of the Ridgewood lodge because of his advocacy against the Elk's racially discriminatory policies.[21][22] A resolution to repeal the discriminatory clause passed in 1973 after failing at 3 previous national conventions.[23] In 1989, there were allegations of applicants being denied membership in lodges located in various parts of California because of their race...[24]
Absolutely incorrect. Society never ok'ed vigilante justice. Many of those Confederate etc. statues were taken down by the authorities. That doesn't "open the door" for criminal actions and vigilantism.