Being tolerant is a great virtue. A calm person, patient, peaceful, tolerant with others is something enjoyable. By rule, such behavior generates feelings and peaceful relationships.
But, in my humble opinion, tolerance may also leads to violence. Consider that much of the oppression and usurpation has its preferred field in tolerance. And if you are continuously very tolerant in a uncomfortable situation, violence will rise over you. While there is peaceful field, there will be space for more invasion. In a large number of companies, if you're so tolerant, what can happen is running out of work.
I have a bad example to tell you. It happened with a manager 10 years ago. He saw field to conquer in chairman's tolerance. And the more tolerance available he had, the more he engendered strategies of usurpation. For instance, he refused to follow directions, took initiatives in breach of company policy, became insolent. He did the same with his staff. Until one day when the situation became unbearable. He had conquered too much. And suddenly the chairman became less more tolerant. Not fired him, but changed the voice's tone, informed him in writing directives, and reduced at once the excessive freedom of action.
And the manager himself became a lamb, subservient, helpful, cynically cooperative.
Usually tolerance is seen as weakness, impotence, pacifism. The perception I have about this is that tolerance is something essential, but should be defined in advance. Like everything in life, a tolerant person must also learn to set boundaries. To protect the relationship with others.