'Modern usage seems to have evolved the term to the version that I am familiar with, i.e. avoiding insulting or marginalising people.'
Yes but this is like Orwellian Ministry of Truth thought crime. lokk at the original meaning of the term - which meant not challenging the approved political orthodoxy. It has changed over time as the luvvies have sought to narrow any possible divergence to what they consider politically correct thought. It is all about trying to control thought and free expression. Farage has blown their whol game wide open by his straight talking and that is what has shocked them, tat someone had the courage to challenge them, and that is why so many people have started supporting Farage as they see him a s a breath of fresh air against the rest who are "all the same", are "all in it together" and "all speak they same".
It will be political correctness that is the elite's and the luvvies' Achlles Heel, it is that that will end their whole game. They rigged markets, they rigged the system
"Wealthy elites have co-opted political power to rig the rules of the economic game, undermining democracy and creating a world where 85 richest people own the wealth of half of the world's population,
and they tried to control free speech. It will be their rigging of free speech that will bring them down, not the rigging of markets, money and finance. They reached too high, like Icarus they thought they were capable of anything and that the people would put up with everything.
"Wealthy elites have co-opted political power to rig the rules of the economic game, undermining democracy and creating a world where 85 richest people own the wealth of half of the world's population.
"Lord Ashcroft: voters defecting to Ukip because they are fed up with political correctness
Lord Ashcroft spent thousands doing polls and he sussed what is really going on.
Voters are defecting from the Conservatives to Ukip because they are fed up with political correctness, not because of Europe, Lord Ashcroft said today."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/9752197/Lord-Ashcroft-voters-defecting-to-Ukip-because-they-are-fed-up-with-political-correctness.html
"I am also interested in the notion that charities ought not to have political objectives."
It depends what the objectives are and who the luvvies employed at the charities are. Charities should be independent of political bias otherwise they risk losing their good reputation of impartiality and charitable giving. It is similar to how the Queen is above party politics and is supposed to represent the people and not any individual luvvies in political parties.
'Public losing faith in charities after fat-cat revelations and Syria claims '
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10920297/Public-losing-faith-in-charities-after-fat-cat-revelations-and-Syria-claims.html
"How Labour STILL rules the quangos: Party stuffed public bodies with its supporters while in power to establish 'government in exile' which holds sway even today"
CHARITIES
The notorious ‘Quango Queen’ Dame Suzi Leather was accused of using her £80,000-a-year (plus perks) job heading the Charity Commission to wage war on private schools, by attempting to strip some of them of their charitable status.
The former polytechnic lecturer earned huge sums from the public purse. Her senior quango posts included Consumer Focus, Exeter NHS trust, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and the Food Standards Agency.
Her reign was finally brought to an end in 2012, though last year, she resurfaced as a member of the governing body of the General Medical Council.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2551264/How-Labour-STILL-rules-quangos-Party-stuffed-public-bodies-supporters-power-establish-government-exile-holds-sway-today.html
Charities must always serve the people and must avoid being staffed by Labour luvvies or amu other luvvies. it is vital that they retain the respect of the public and are not seen as politically biased in any way.