I think some types of aggressive activism are worse than apathy

I am not referring to slacktivism, hashtag activism or bandwagon activism where there is nothing to lose. Kony 2012 may have been an emotional bandwagon, but at least it rose awareness of it and it was peaceful and harmless. That type of activism, while it may come off as a bit silly, at least accomplishes something positive.

I am referring to the type of "activism" where all people do is sit on their armchair and spew a bunch of destructive language or go insane and do a bunch of aggressive practices that is not only ineffective but does nothing but cause harm. For example, those Baltimore/Ferguson rioters who think they are giving civil rights a voice by sacking businesses, but are only ruining the lives of innocent shopkeepers and destroying their communities' reputation. I also see quite a bit of Facebook and YouTube pages for activism in other countries, and often the comments are filled with a bunch of racist and destructive language from armchair critics.

Am I saying that activism is bad in general? No. Activism is perhaps the major cornerstone of progress in the world. I commend the peaceful civil rights activists, animal activists and human rights activists. Without activism, India would not have been a country, black people would still have been second class citizens and there would be no laws against animal cruelty. However, I think the people who resort to mindless destructive "activism" like say boycotting sushi stores to protest whaling in Japan and smashing buildings to protest the murders of unarmed black men are no better if not worse than people who don't care.

Is it normal to think that way?