Hindu tolerance may actually be mere indifference or flaccid latitudinarianism

Evidence

Conflict itself resolves the tension between contrasts. The fact that it aims at peace is only one, an especially obvious, expression of its nature: the synthesis of elements that work both against and for one another. This nature appears more clearly when it is realized that both forms of relation—the antithetical and the convergent—are fundamentally distinguished from the mere indifference of two or more individuals or groups. Whether it implies the rejection or the termination of sociation, indifference is purely negative. In contrast to such pure negativity, conflict contains something positive. Its positive and negative aspects, however, are integrated; they can be separated conceptually, but not empirically. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 276 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Hindu tolerance is really weakness or indifference, not virtue; Belief in Hindu shastras is incompatible with liberal or moderate self-identification; Neither denunciation nor privatized tolerance can create genuine Muslim-non-Muslim respect (+2 more)

Related

• Hindu tolerance is really weakness or indifference, not virtue (similarity 0.82)
• So-called Hindu tolerance is actually weakness and indifference caused by caste. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Conflict is a positive force distinct from mere indifference #complicates (0.80) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 276
• Belief in Hindu shastras is incompatible with liberal or moderate self-identification #expands (0.50)
• Neither denunciation nor privatized tolerance can create genuine Muslim-non-Muslim respect #corroborates (0.40)
• Communal philosophy need not imply unanimous belief among members #qualifies (0.35)