If no-one can show that blacked up dancers are intending to cause offence then not letting them be could be seen as the thin end of a wedge.

Who said anything about "not letting them" black-up? It's up to them what they do: I just wish they'd see sense and drop the blackface. Not the thin end of the wedge at all - just a suggestion that they consider ditching a wholly unnecessary part of their artificially resuscitated "tradition".

Tell me precisely how a morris man, dressing up in a tatter jacket, putting heavy boots and bell pads on, wearing a hat decorated with flowers and feathers, and painiting their face is in ANY WAY demeaning to someone of a different ethnic origin or skin colour? As I said, the face paint is just part of the kit! Perhaps putting feathers in their hat is also indicative of them having issues with pheasants!

Regardless of the intent, blackface used for entertainment in the 21st Century cannot escape the racist legacy of minstrelry - even when that is not the intention. We can argue this point till we're blue in the face, but we can't get away from the fact that this unneccessary insistance on respecting some dubious tradition will be refracted though the lens of minstrelry. We can't magic that part of our history away - but we can learn from it.