The problem is that before long, the edited version becomes the only available version.

And once we start with these edits, say for blatant racism, do we also have to appease groups who are deeply offended by sexism/misogyny, profanity, blasphemy, nudity, drugs, gambling, alcohol, meat-eating, fossil fuels, and probably more?

Better off to leave the work intact, and when necessary just add a content warning up front, to remind people that a creative work was the product of a specific time period and in no way an endorsement of language/behavior that is seen as completely unacceptable today.

So you're saying it's a slippery slope?

Many slopes do turn out to be fairly slippery, despite frequent claims that low-friction inclined surfaces are merely logical fallacies.

People complained about the very mild language policing of 'political correctness' way back in the 90s, and look where we are now, rewriting Roald Dahl to purge words like 'fat', and discussing whether we should actively edit the unpleasantness out of more of our cultural history, wondering whether a favourite book will even still tell the same story if I re-read it on Kindle in a few years time.

I don't really have issue with the roald dahl edits. They're books for children, not for adults to appreciate the art and historicity of the story telling. Kids books are usually about morals and entertainment, and they model their language and behavior after books to an extent that adults don't. So, edit away I say. But also make sure the originals are available somewhere(which they are, since they sold into the millions)

How kids talk to each other is way way worse now than when I grew up in my experience. Calling each other 'whores' or different combinations of 'fuck'.

Having a state-ish approved nomenclature that is way off their everyday one has to be phsycois inducing.