Please edit it (grammatically and rhetorically)

I imagine that that passage was translated by a computer.

Thanks.

But I'm curious which sentence or clause would be ambiguous in your eye. I read it through and found it crystal clear.

(PS. the so-called retraction of Lincoln's article is just a humour.)

Grammatically, the phrase: ". . .every American President never knows how to repect others. . ." should probably read: ". . .every American President has never known how to respect others. . ."

In terms of punctuation, I'd place the phrase: "the president of Peking University, who claimed that every American President never knows how to respect others" within em dashes to avoid the over use of commas and the lack of clarity that ensues thereof. I'd also omit the comma between "again" and "because" in the first sentence.

It is unclear to whom "the guy" is referring to, "that man" at the begining of the first sentence or Lincoln. I suspect "the guy" is referring to "that man" of the first sentence, but it is ambiguous, and leads me to think that it may be referring to Lincoln. The use of the pronouns "his" and "he" in the next sentence is also ambiguous.

In terms of rhetoric, I fail to understand the joke about Lincoln deciding to retract is article. Also, I fail to understand what "thus, the guy has recovered his slavery" refers to or means.

Additionally, I fail to see how Lincoln's retraction ties in with some philosophy of many more pleasures coming to a retarded child, and someone enjoying their retardation in servitude, and respecting that decision (what decision, exactly?).

I think that the use of present simple was intended, Infra. It's certainly more pointedly accurate. The present simple tense describes the habitual, the routine, the general truth. It's a given - no matter who gets elected, it could be Jesus himself, that person turns into, is turned into a war criminal, a terrorist.

Thank you Infra! Your analysis has cleared the cloud why McTag would say that was a machine-translated passage. The original text is below (someone in DXY, a famous Chinese medical forum is called "Black Ugliness" (the meaning of his username in Chinese, whose pet phrase is "many more pleasures come to a retarded child"). I changed the word "negro" to avoid any possible offense and caused ambiguity.)

(The retraction of articles from world-renowned journals - including Science and Nature-- goes more popular these days due to widespread scientific misconduct)

Please comment on the original text (grammatically and rhetorically):

That DXY negro will probably not come here again, because his support for Zhou Qifeng, the president of Peking University, who claimed that every American President never knows how to repect others, has led to the fact that Lincoln decided to retract his article Proclamation of Emancipation from Science (or Nature?). Thus, the black ugliness has, successfully, recovered his slavery. If his philosophy is "MANY MORE pleasures have come to a retarded child" and he indeed enjoys his retardation in servitude, why not repect his decision? The negro has his free will, after all.

I believe "his" in "his philosophy" can clearly refer to " (the negro's) ". Am I on the right track?

Cool. That's it. Thank you JTT.

I wonder whether this original text is ambiguous too.

I guess the name of "the black ugliness " is offensive in English SO NO ONE WOULD LIKE TO REPLY HERE. But the Chinese guy who assumed this name thought it over in the context of oriental philosophy: it is safest to place you yourself in a position where no one likes.