Very much.
Well, let me be the first to say: welcome (back?) to Off Topic
The problem with anything relating to "political correctness" is it's inherently based in ideology as such it's difficult to get value from discussions around it (my opinion of course lol). The Wiki page was helpfully linked in the original thread, but I'll quote the etmyology of the phrase (from Wiki) for convenience, which may be helpful.
Early usage of the term politically correct by leftists in the 1970s and 1980s was as self-critical satire; usage was ironic, rather than a name for a serious political movement. It was considered an in-joke among leftists used to satirise those who were too rigid in their adherence to political orthodoxy.
The modern pejorative usage of the term emerged from conservative criticism of the New Left in the late 20th century. This usage was popularized by a number of articles in The New York Times and other media throughout the 1990s, and was widely used in the debate surrounding Allan Bloom's 1987 book The Closing of the American Mind. The term gained further currency in response to Roger Kimball's Tenured Radicals (1990), and conservative author Dinesh D'Souza's 1991 book Illiberal Education.
Commentators on the political left in the United States contend that conservatives use the concept of political correctness to downplay and divert attention from substantively discriminatory behavior against disadvantaged groups. They also argue that the political right enforces its own forms of political correctness to suppress criticism of its favored constituencies and ideologies. In the United States, the term has played a major role in the "culture war" between liberals and conservatives.
Which demonstrates neatly the problem in discussing any accusation of political correctness, because it's a word weighted in rhetoric from one side / part of the (cultural) political spectrum. It's a phrased design and intended from the (modern) offset to be weaponised that has
also bled into slighter wider (mostly online) culture.
The second is evidence. We (here in OT) recently had a thread on "cancel culture", which is often related to political correctness along the same kind of lines, and there's often a major push for specific examples. It's very easy to say <something> is destroying society, etc. It's harder to demonstrate this. Now, in any real terms, is Civilisation VI going to "destroy society" or even anything close to that? Of course not, it's a video game. It's a good, popular, and inspiring one (I love it), but it's "just" a video game. It's not historically-accurate to a fault; history services the game itself rather than the other way around.
So, to me, it becomes this merry-go-round of being a mere example in the greater "culture war" (from the Wiki excerpt). The problem isn't Civ 6 particularly, or really anything Civ 6 does. As the original thread demonstrates, the most, uh, vocal pushback is from individuals that believe political correctness as a "thing" is encroaching on society as a whole. And that's a very tricky thing to discuss, for the reasons mentioned earlier in my post.
That's my summary, enjoy your stay!
