There was violence, vandalism, and the literal point of his protests was civil disturbance. I'm pretty sure the point of any protest is civil disturbance.
The big distinction is: black people in the civil rights era were very much being oppressed by a racist and white supremacist establishment. That makes any violence and vandalism seem a whole lot more justified. I think anyone in the west has the right to protest (which again, is inevitably going to be some kind of civil disturbance because that's the fucking point of a protest) - but I'm not sure violence and vandalism can be excused when people are protesting against oppression that the protestors themselves are not experiencing. Nobody in the US is directly in harms way from Hamas or the IDF, it's difficult to justify Americans destroying stuff, threatening violence/committing violence, over something happening millions of miles away from them.
We've seen nutjobs in the US, Europe, and Australia literally kill other people over this conflict that they're not actually in any danger from, other than the fact radicalisation has made some people go absolutely mental. It's normal to be disgusted by a music festival being attacked with both murder and rape, or the constant stream of images of dead kids that come out of Gaza. It's not normal to be made rabidly violent and lose all humanity in the wake of a conflict where the two belligerents are routinely committing war crimes.
The international community should be pushing for a peace in a region that's constantly looking like it is at the brink of war. People shouldn't be taking sides in a fight where war crimes are the norm and egging on this conflict to keep escalating.