Cleese was upset that The Germans was removed from listings/censored because of some of the dialogue[1]. He wasn't distasteful of the his old programme (as in "I wouldn't have written it that way today"[2]), but of the way it caused the blocking of the programme without considering the context[3] and how it contextualised it as 'abnormal'.
Compare with Little Britain with its shock-comedy. The WI lady who projectile vomits (to ridiculous extents) on encountering any sight or sound of 'diversity' that threatens her world-view might be considered a "laugh at the prejudice, not at that prejudiced against", and The 'Only' Gay In The Village who seems to be as prejudiced and willingly blind to the truly enlightened nature of his home town as any homophobe in denial would be. 'Emily' ("I'm A Lady"), and occasionally a disciple to the cause (with the gruff "...a'right!"), is a difficult one. Making fun of Trans, or just making fun of some people's reductionist ideas of transvestitism?
But then there's the fatsuit (and, if it even needs to be mentioned, the blackface fatsuit) for the rather 'out there' fading-but-overly-effusive female once-glamorous but now just cringeworthy characters who had plenty of vanity but no inhibitions. Perhaps they (at the time) tried to balance that with the steroided-up musclemen ("musclesuits", with micropenises that also were a regular reveal), but it was probably at the 'wrong end' of a largely two-handed multicharacter act (both men, with or without their own alternate sexualities and natural body-shapes) who weren't averse to portraying a wide range of subjects in their work... Undoubtedly very good at varying their output across a wide range (Lou and Andy, with their own problematic issues[4], were both far more toned-down 'impressions'), but just because you can create a certain character doesn't always mean you should.
I think Lucas and Walliams have said that they wouldn't do some of that these days (though Walliams has had more recent trouble, in Britain's Got Talent I think it was), and even if I probably wasn't critical at the time (beyond it being a set of rapid firing cringe-sketches, off a little beyond my comfort zone if I wasn't intrigued enough to be sat watching the not-so-cringy moments of possible brilliance, or at least imagination) then I'm probably unlikely to seek out a streaming service holding their shows for a spot of nostalgia.
But nothing like that reticance with Fawlty Towers. A dozen(?) episodes in total, dealing with a variety of 'comedies of error' situations, and I don't think I'd say even The Germans is in bad taste. Even/especially in hindsight. You're not going to get much inadvertant audience 'sympathy' with the less nice viewpoints portrayed (a problem that Till Death Do Us Part had, Alf Garnett intended as a parody and figure of derision but attractedva "Yeah, I think that too" following by those who just didn't get the right joke), and the ridicule lands firmly and fairly upon those who perpetually rudiculous.
(That being Cleese's point, I believe, and I would clearly agree.)
But I'm worried that now!Cleese could be different and no longer aligned to what now!me thinks could and should be done. Apparently he has some stint on GB News. Which is a warning flag in my mind, given what I think about other guest stinters and full-blown presenters on GB News are like in political/political commentary circles. A British clone of Fox ('News'), it seems. I don't think they've sought for a wide range of possible iconoclasts to allow a wide and nicely representative spread of iconoclasms. So it makes me wary, even though I think Cleese fronted LibDem (or was it even pre-LibDem, the original Liberals?) Party Election Broadcasts, three or four decades ago.
[1] It featured an 'of his time' (i.e. purposely old fashioned even at that time) character using language increasingly deemed 'no longer appropriate'.
[2] Maybe he actually wouldn't, but I don't think he would shy away from a more contemporary 'edgy' character saying something else that is currently 'allowed' but controversial/thought-provoking as a character-establishing moment.
[3] The characters saying things that shouldn't be said were saying them because they had no inhibitions. Either an old person who had clearly never learnt to have them, or a concussioned one not being able to properly reason (even to his usual low level of self-control).
[4] Andy is faking disability, when it suits him. And Lou certainly ends up helping him, and empowering him to do so, however oblivious it seems he must be to the well-timed trickery.