We called him ‘Dicky’. In the 1970s and early 80s, the short form of ‘Richard’ was pejorative.
President Richard Nixon, fallen from grace over Watergate, had debased the moniker, and the slightly cartoonish sound that ‘Dicky’ made was, for us, an assault on the man’s dignity.
His colleagues knew him as Professor Richard Lynn, and he was a member of the psychology department at the New University of Ulster when I was a student there.
Subsequently he taught and researched psychology in its successor institution.
After he retired Lynn was honoured with the title Emeritus Professor, allowing him to continue to call himself ‘professor’ into retirement, even though he had no formal teaching or research role.
Although the title is merely honorific, it bestows a high degree of academic credibility on an individual.
As far back as the 1970s, Lynn’s grip on academic credibility was tenuous, and his students – and many of his colleagues – knew it.
Dicky Lynn, who died last year in his nineties, had no difficulty describing himself a ‘scientific racist’.
He believed that some races had higher IQs than others, and that men were more intelligent than women.
His worldview gave academic credibility to the racists and demagogues who currently hold sway in western politics.
His research was poisonous and pernicious, and we protested about it then – to no avail.
As a professor he had ‘tenure’, which meant he was free to say whatever he wished within his field of study and he couldn’t be sacked for his views.
Tenure is a device that protects academics who express ideas that challenge society’s accepted wisdom.
Academic freedom is to be prized in any democratic society but, as in the case of Lynn, it can sometimes be used to defend the indefensible.
It was only in 2018 that UU saw the light and revoked Lynn’s emeritus status following protests by students. But by then, he was in his late eighties and not on the staff.
As a student journalist I interviewed him. He was urbane and emollient. But that did not disguise the fact that he viewed me as intellectually inferior to students who came from other countries.
He believed that Ireland’s economic plight was, in all likelihood, attributable to the low IQ of its people. His disciples today say the same thing of Palestinians.
Lynn believed that people from Africa had a lower IQ than Europeans and Asians and – as I have already noted – pushed the bizarre notion that women were intellectually inferior to men.
As you can imagine, his stereotype of the ‘thick Paddy’ did not go down well with the less than thick Paddys, or the women students, taking his modules.
Our protests then fell on deaf ears, and Lynn continued to publish his research with impunity, and in spite of clear evidence that it did not stand up to scrutiny.
This past week, the academic publisher Elsevier revealed that it was now reviewing its decision to publish Lynn’s research – it provides access to more than 100 papers by him.
Of particular cause for concern is Lynn’s methodology, and his distortion of results to fit his world view.
Although late in the day, this is important because his views on race, and his belief that western civilisation is under threat from ethnic groups who are intellectually inferior to white Anglo-Saxons, is being used by the culture warriors today in the United States, in Britain and across the continent.
It gives cover to racists and misogynists, and undermines our common humanity.
In the wake of Elsevier’s move, it would be good to hear an unequivocal refutation of Lynn’s views from the institution that gave him a platform to promote them.
In closing, I would like to touch on another issue involving Ulster University – this week’s report on the future of its Derry outpost.
In a platform piece in this newspaper on Saturday, economy minister Conor Murphy made it clear that he has accepted the status quo. The Magee campus will remain subservient to UU’s whims. The wrongs of the sixties will not be righted.
“The idea of starting from scratch and establishing a new university would set us back years,” he said.
“Negotiating a new political consensus and creating an entirely new institution is not a realistic option.”
Firstly, it would not be “starting from scratch”. Magee’s pedigree stretches back to 1865 – it is only 20 years younger that Queen’s.
Secondly, if doing right by Derry is too big a task for a Sinn Féin minister, how can the party ever hope to “negotiate a new political consensus” to reunify Ireland? I think we should be told.