Oyyoyyoy:
I’m not sure that your assertion that “out-box people are more tolerant” is correct. As I pointed out in my second response to writersoul, I think their tolerance is more of a function of being in the middle than of not being in a group. Let’s assume that the average out-of-the-boxer is somewhere between modern and yeshivish (which may or may not be true, but I’m assuming it for the sake of making a point, and also I think it is what hashtag’s original post was about). So while the out-of-the-boxer might be more tolerant of the yeshivisher than the modernite is of the yeshivisher, and he is more tolerant of the modernite than the yeshivisher is of the modernite, he might be less tolerant of an open orthodoxite than the modernite is of the open orthodoxite, and he might be less tolerant of an extreme anti-zionist than the yeshivisher is of the extreme anti-zionist. This would be because a modernite is ideologically closer to an open orthodoxite than our protagonist is and a yeshivisher is ideologically closer to the anti-zionist than our protagonist is.
In essence my point is that I suspect that most out-of-the-boxers are not really out of the box; they are either in between two boxes or vacillating between two boxes. Naturally people will be more tolerant of those who are ideologically closer to them than they are of those who are not as ideologically close to them. However, someone who is truly out of the box is someone who doesn’t identify with any group, but appreciates different aspects of different groups and perhaps evaluates every issue separately. Such a person might have commonalities with every group along the ideological spectrum, and such a person will probably be more tolerant. Or I could also see such a person being less tolerant since he disagrees with every group. So maybe I take back what I just said, and in reality, tolerance has nothing to do with where you stand, but simply with how tolerant you are. Or maybe I’m not making any sense. I don’t know, so I’ll let you guys decide.