Fine by me. Most all of the stories you hear about people who claim actions in association with anonymous are not conducting altruistic things. They're script kiddies that spread chaos because they can, and lack the foresight and maturity to realize that their actions really only have real impacts on innocent bystanders most of the time.
Don't like the system? Work from within it, don't hack it from the outside.
If large entities like wikipedia sponsored hacking to combat the controversial issues like SOPA, as opposed to activism through education and protest like they did, things would have gone much differently. Don't like that paypal etc. wouldn't process wikileaks transactions? Protest the services by not using them, and educate as many people as you can about the situation. If enough people actually care, things will change. If they don't, then maybe you should take another look at your situation.
To those saying that the punishment should fit the crime, examine just how wide-spread a shut-down of financial institutions impacts everyday life. For people whose livelihoods rely on banking or paypal transactions, you can easily destroy an innocent person's livelyhood with just a few days or a week of cutting off access to their financial transaction institutions. For small businesses that don't have giant surpluses of cash, and need to buy supplies with a majority of their daily revolving revenue from transactions, if you cut off those transactions they have no means to buy supplies to support their business. Can't buy supplies, can't support their business, they shut down. Not a small deal.