Well, you're not really defining what you consider 'passive communication' or why you harbor this view, so there seems to be material missing to formulate a nua

Well, you're not really defining what you consider 'passive communication' or why you harbor this view, so there seems to be material missing to formulate a nuanced reply. Assuming you are defining "passive communication" the way the parent comment does, the answer seems clear: passive communication does not engage, examine or disclose its beliefs, but instead papers over their existence and applies them indiscriminately. The passivity of that communication is rooted in tone, but not about conflict avoidance or politeness as the examples listed under active communication suggest - rather, it's a tone of wheedling insistence, if such a racy and vivid metaphor can be accurate.