I think there's enough information present to get a sense of the Tao between the two... vandals are, if not a complete straw man, at least an over-hyped source of genuine danger.

Personally, I'd take vandalism, and having to white-wash my storefront any day, over a government forcing my payment processors to shut me down by fiat. Frankly it's hard to imagine someone I'd sympathize with who wouldn't feel the same way; but if you're that person, now's the time to air reason on the side of order; a few weeks from now the cause will definitely be lost.

As the not-so-old adage goes, what is the difference between ordinary crooks and government crooks? At least you can call the cops on the ordinary crooks. So in that sense, yes, Anonymous is less likely to damage me or my property in way that is unrecoverable.

However, in the long run I don't think web vandalism is a pragmatic solution to the SOPA mess. Right now we have the opportunity to potentially defeat SOPA through legal, peaceful advocacy. Let's seize that opportunity and exploit it to the fullest before anyone considers engaging in criminal acts as part of an anti-SOPA campaign.

To speak your mind on SOPA, to disassociate yourself from those who endorse it, and to attempt to persuade your representatives are all well within your First Amendment rights. To damage or destroy the property of others toward the same goals is certainly not protected speech and I'd say a great deal of soul-searching would be required before one could justify going that far.

If SOPA's proponents fight dirty, why can't the opposition? I'm speaking pragmatically here. Unfortunately, institutions are amoral to the core, and respond best to power. Affecting change is not as easy as maintaining the moral high ground and repeating your position. People may need to feel the consequences of their actions.

There must be a way to use the public's fear as a way to carry this message. Why can't we fund commercials for each state that list the bill's supporters as trying to censor the Internet? Alternately, why not blackout some of the more important routers in protest? I hate that I'm suggesting we break things temporarily to get people's attention, but, what else is new, right?

The problem is marketing: how do we make people care?

I think we should break things. If I ran any US-facing websites I was the beneficiary of, I'd break them in a heartbeat. But it's not really the answer. The US congress is full of what appear (on youtube) to be cockroaches. They're not sycophants or nice guys who started well but somehow ended up favoring the deportation and torture of civilians, censorship of the internet, and negating your property rights in favor of multinationals that want to frack your pasture. You really should deal with the vermin the way Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, and now Syrians have dealt with theirs; we wouldn't be having this stupid conversation if the aliens that ran your country weren't a bunch of unrepentant nazis.

So now you pried my opinion outta me ;)