AC, no doubting the cultural differences. However, a good argument can be made based on the intrinsic properties of the two religious types.
In a way, superstitions are not reduced in monotheism but concentrated into the one god or his apostle. From that, I can see how the jealousy of a typical monotheistic tyrant god bully doesn't translate as such in polytheism. And following on from that still, intolerance wouldn't be quite the same.
Arthur Schopenhauer said this on that specific difference:
Indeed, intolerance is essential only to monotheism; an only God is by nature a jealous God who will not allow another to live. On the other hand, polytheistic gods are naturally tolerant; they live and let live. In the first place, they gladly tolerate their colleagues, the gods of the same religion, and this tolerance is afterwards extended even to foreign gods who are accordingly, hospitably received and later admitted, in some cases, even to an equality of rights. An instance of this is seen in the Romans who willingly admitted and respected Phrygian, Egyptian and other foreign gods. Thus it is only the monotheistic religions that furnish us with the spectacle of religious wars, religious persecutions, courts for trying heretics, and also with that of iconoclasm, the destruction of the images of foreign gods, the demolition of Indian temples and Egyptian colossi that had looked at the sun for three thousand years; all this because their jealous God had said: "Thou shall make no graven image" and so on.