I disagree, Euphemism. Pluralism is a political type system, it was developed as a political solution to disparate religions, guaranteeing freedom of religion as a universal right, and making religion and state separate, so that religions could co-exist within the polis.
Also, there are tribal groups in the world who have traditionally animistic religions. Politically these groups are status-driven and non-democratic (ancient NZ Maori is an eg).
I agree however that a polytheistic, non-pluralist society will be likely more tolerant of individuality than a monotheistic non-pluralist society. (the Vikings were polytheistic and respected individuality, but they had no respect for the rights of other peoples and practised slavery).
Thanks for the thought-provoking thread.
Trumangirl