> A censor would remove the offending books from circulation

That is actually not what censoring a book means. According to the Oxford Dictionary [1]:

> to remove the parts of a book, film, etc. that are considered to be offensive or a political threat

Regarding your last comment:

> Please explain how releasing an edited, updated version of a book that is more marketable in today’s world is censorship when the original works are fully available.

That would be by definition.

Regarding your second comment:

> The original book will continue to be found in used book stores, church rummage sales, parents end tables, and so on for years and years to come. Scans are certainly available online at the various pirate sites, so likely available for my lifetime at least.

They would be around. They would become rarer and rarer overtime. Most people would grow up believing that the author wrote the censored version of the book. Moreover, they would grow up believing that the way the book was written was reflective of the setting of the book in our actual history. That is the way of things and the censurers know it.

[1]: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis...

You’d have to assume a conspiracy among all historians both amateur and professional for that cliche to be true. The people that write history are humans and they all behave and believe in different ways. You’ll never find an unbiased version of history whether it’s written by the victors or the defeated.

That’s a cartoon depiction of censorship. You can censor by editing or omitting text as well. The black bar would actually be preferable because it would clearly indicate that there was content there before and that someone had censored it. It’d only be improved by writing the names and addresses of the censors in the book so they can be judged appropriately by history.

Black baring over text is a form of redaction.