Steven Taylor is a professor and clinical psychologist who wrote a book titled The Psychology of Pandemics. The book was published in October of 2019, just a month before the Covid-19 story broke. One might suggest that he predicted or had insider knowledge about the coming event because of how prescient his book is. I can't find much information about Taylor outside of his publications, so I can't confirm or deny his involvement in any sort of conspiracy (I checked into obvious connections like Bill Gates, World Economic Forum, etc.).
However, coincidence or not, he demonstrates so many similarities between past viral outbreaks to the Covid-19 event... all the lessons were already there from history, only this is a hyped-up "pandemic" on steroids. 
Much of what Taylor has to say is tedious and overly focused on how to make the herd comply with their overlords for pandemic preparedness. Taylor knew there would be a future "pandemic," as many have happened in the past, and every year, there are scientists warning about future pandemics. But could he have predicted a more impotent virus? You would think he would denounce this as a hoax. "I meant an actual pandemic," he would say... If you thought that, then you'd be wrong, because he is promoting the same hoax as the MSM.
None of the supposed post-1918 pandemics have been all that noteworthy, and we certainly haven't had anything on the scale of the bubonic plague. The key ingredient is the pharmaceutical industry gearing up in tandem with the media to hype these events, so they can sell their vaccines. The Covid-19 hoax is profitable and expedient for far more than vaccine manufacturers. You can also look to the "Great Reset" of the World Economic Forum and adjacent groups. The environmentalists are chipping in for climate lockdowns. Technologists will also have many applications when it comes to the expansion of the surveillance state and the implementation of gene therapy and other innovations.
1918 Influenza Pandemic
Taylor chooses to start his first chapter with a quote from a man who experienced the 1918 influenza pandemic. Both Covid-19 skeptics and believers  alike have referred to the 1918 event to support their arguments, and it's very often that skeptics will say that the severity of the illness, number of adverse events, hospitalization, and rate of death were much higher in 1918, yet they didn't do lockdowns, wear masks, or do anything overly drastic. They just "kept calm and carried on" as the stoic British phrase went (now a bit of a cuck mantra).
The more I read about 1918, the less true that seems. In the man's anecdote, he states that "The city had ground to a halt. Schools and theaters were closed, and dances and other social gatherings were banned. James was not even allowed to go to the local playground because his father feared he would fall ill. Church services were banned, despite protests from the clergy... People were afraid to leave their homes, he recalled, although it was necessary for the government to impose fines if an infected person was out in public, because some sick people refused to stay indoors." (p. 1)
Facemasks were widely used during this period, and they were even mandated by law in many locations. The article cites one instance of a man being arrested for non-compliance. The Oakland Tribune reported that the police chief had stated, “We are going to enforce this mask ordinance if we have to pack the city jail with people. This epidemic is too serious to be taken as a joke, and men arrested … will find that it’s no laughing matter when they face the police judges.” It's also true that masks are unsanitary and useless for preventing the spread of viruses—no one should even argue that cloth and surgical masks are anything but worthless.
The mask mandates led to the Anti-Mask League forming to advocate against mask usage. Taylor also promotes masks. They were useless during 1918-1920, and they are useless now. Not very surprising.
Another interesting aspect is that experimental vaccines were rolled out in 1918 as well. They were absolute rubbish as a result of the erroneous belief that influenza was caused by bacteria instead of a virus. (p. 16)
Vaccine hesitancy he mentions as a problem for seasonal flu, but their isn't much evidence flu shots are really that effective, and we can easily see that Covid-19 vaccines are worthless, since they're already pushing booster shots and mask mandates for the vaxed, and the most vaxed countries are experiencing higher rates of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths compared to more relaxed areas.
This is a psychologist's perspective of the "pandemic" that is in line with the true believers. It of course touches on the propagation of conspiracy theories and misinformation during the time of a pandemic (p. 15).
Almost all the medical totalitarianism we're seeing was happening during the 1918 pandemic (perhaps it can be argued that some of the measures, even if they may not have been effective, in retrospect, at least appeared a bit more reasonable for those circumstances; and enough information should have been gathered from that incident to prevent us from making any of the same mistakes, but history is especially prone to repeat itself when it will benefit the elites.). There were the true believers and the skeptics. There were lockdowns, there were masks, and there were vaccines; there was also opposition to all of these measures. The only difference, according to Taylor, is the scale of the measures and the opposition is grander and broader.
There will, and has, been a backlash, and that has always been the case when harsh measures are taken.
“The anti-lockdown, anti-mask, anti-vax protests have been a lot more prevalent than they were 100 years ago, even if they were motivated for the same reasons,” he said. Taylor theorizes that with the Delta variant on the rise, any return to lockdown could trigger an exaggerated backlash and rebellion – part of the psychological phenomenon commonly known as pandemic fatigue.
Chapter 9 especially—and some others—are heavy on propaganda and seem to be a masterclass in how the establishment can propagandize the masses, but the issue is that all of this very precise psychological theory can be narrowed down to those who believe in the narrative and those who don't. The narrative is false, so those who don't believe in it are actually correct, and if not for censorship, it's unlikely Covid-19 would have been such a successful project for the elites.
Taylor decries conspiracy theories and how the skeptics have "erroneous beliefs," but the author applies no critical thinking to the subject, nor does he look at information that would lend credence to what the skeptics are saying. I could presume his research is rather poor, but I think he recognizes these gaps—he's probably ambitious and concerned about his legacy within the system, and he won't deviate from what he's realized to be the "proper" narrative foisted upon us by the elites. He simply cites "authoritative sources" that label his critics as uneducated, of low intelligence, etc. This same tactic is used with so many threads of the mainstream narrative. Whether it's the medical and agricultural establishments, government corruption, Jews, the holocaust, anthropogenic climate change, etc. It's lazy, shallow, and frustrating.
How could anyone with a modicum of knowledge about what is going on submit to "health authorities" to decide everything for them? At least Taylor is a little more subtle than Forbes or New York Times, when they tell you to not do your own research or use critical thinking, and you should instead listen to the bought and paid "experts," yet his "just trust the science, guys" sentiment is more or less the same. Many aspects of how Covid-19 measures were rolled out were incompetent, to say the least, and Taylor's main focus ever since the event began is to fine tune the process. He has a blog where he posts semi-regular updates on Covid-19 developments, his own research, and the research of others. Reducing vaccine hesitancy is one of his concerns. There have been efforts to increase the vaccination rate by offering incentives, such as food, gifts, money, and other perks—as well as a lottery of $1 million in Ohio. They don't work, for the truly hesitant (and not just disinterested) are concerned about safety. Unfortunately for his ilk, the vaccines are demonstrably not safe according to VAERS and European databases and news reports.
Vaccine hesitant people are unlikely to be persuaded unless a swat team rappels into their house and holds them down for an injection. There definitely are people who didn't want to take the vaccine, but they succumbed to pressure to maintain their careers. There are also people who have gotten the shot with the naive belief of "going back to normal." The coercion campaign has been effective for certain subgroups, but the intense pressure also is bound to generate skepticism about whether or not the vaccine is safe.
With Australia-esque restrictions and coercion that prevents working or buying food, along with martial law, could lead to the acquiescence of a further number of those who are hesitant, but lack either the resources or the resolve to resist.
Australia, as of now, still only has an estimated 26% of their population fully vaccinated (I believe this is currently about 50% of the population if we're counting only 1 jab), which is well-below most of the other developed countries.
Either the Aussies are less compliant, or their government is overplaying its hand. They have some of the most extreme restrictions, but they're, so far, relying on coercion by private businesses to encourage vaccination, rather than a forced vaccination mandate.
Lockdowns and social distancing result in loneliness, mental health problems, and economic hardship. There is a telling quote in Taylor's book: "However, during the next pandemic, many people will become fearful, some intensely so. The psychological 'footprint' will likely be larger than the medical 'footprint.'" This psychological impact will be more pronounced, more widespread, and longer-lasting. (p. 23)
It's true. The psychological impact is much greater. A psychologist should be the first to warn against these measures unless the disease is sufficiently severe. You know, like a highly infectious and deadly pathogen that leaves piles of bodies out in the streets—especially one that is killing the young and healthy. Covid-19 mostly kills very old people, obese people, and those with over 2 comorbid illnesses. The restrictions, masks, and fear/stress are worsening the mental health and immunity of the population. People are foregoing medical checkups and delaying treatments at high rates. They're being manipulated and lied to about a dangerous vaccine.
In a post-pandemic world, people will have experienced all kinds of losses, including the loss of friends and loved ones due to the coronavirus, the loss of jobs, the bankruptcy of businesses, and foreclosures on homes. Marriages and other relationships will have collapsed under the pressures of lockdown and mounting financial hardship. People will be wary about shaking hands or hugging one another, at least in the short term. An estimated 10% of people will develop severe psychological problems, such as mood disorders, anxiety disorders, or PTSD. These people would likely need help from a mental health professional.
You'd have to be a pretty awful person to recognize Covid-19 is equivalent to the flu, only the death numbers are padded by combining various other diseases and a positive PCR test or the appraisal of symptoms equivalent to Covid-19, and then suggest measures that will damage a country and its people.
Oh, don't worry, there's a "silver lining!"
But the news isn’t all bad. The research on resilience tells us that two-thirds of people will be resilient to the stresses of COVID-19. Some of these people will experience renewed purpose and meaning in their lives, through helping others during the pandemic.
At least destroying the economy and small businesses, the transference of wealth to oligarchs, ruining numerous lives, and needlessly taking our freedoms away will result in a few people finding meaning... I believe this is what he would call Post-traumatic growth (Taylor has coined a few new phrases, but this concept was thought up by Richard Tedeschi and Lawrence Calhoun.)
Laughably, Taylor has coined two new syndromes to describe two groups of people—roughly these correspond to the believers and the skeptics. The former exaggerate the potency of Covid-19 and blindly listen to a handpicked set of experts, while the latter realize the virus is not a serious threat, and they have a realistic perspective and scrutinize the data.
From the abstract of a paper discussing CSS:
Research shows that the COVID Stress Scales have a robust multifactorial structure, representing five correlated facets of COVID-19-related distress: (a) Fear of the dangerousness of COVID-19, which includes fear of coming into contact with fomites potentially contaminated with SARSCoV2, (b) worry about socioeconomic costs of COVID-19 (e.g., worry about personal finances and disruption in the supply chain), (c) xenophobic fears that foreigners are spreading SARSCoV2, (d) traumatic stress symptoms associated with direct or vicarious traumatic exposure to COVID-19 (nightmares, intrusive thoughts, or images related to COVID-19), and (e) COVID-19-related compulsive checking and reassurance seeking. These factors cohere to form a COVID stress syndrome, which we sought to further delineate in the present study.
Frankly, most people probably meet (b)—economic concerns, regardless of which side of the issue they are on. Do we really need to make up syndromes specific to Covid-19, though? Pretty much any disease can cause a degree of stress; when there is a serious pandemic response, doubly so. I checked, and there isn't an "Influenza Stress Syndrome" or anything like that. This psychologist is really milking Covid-19 for all it's worth with his systematic approach.
Of the sample, 16% of participants (n = 6,854) were found to be in the most severe class of the scale and may warrant mental health treatment. Just think of how low mental illness would be if we didn't have a society that promoted fatness and unhealthy lifestyles, and we didn't hoax a pandemic.
I'm embarrassed to think someone might actually be diagnosed with CSS, and they will tell their friends about how they have it; Taylor has gotten some recognition for his book, but he doesn't seem to be getting a lot of traction otherwise, so I think we can all point and laugh at his attempt to become the new pandemic guru (On the other hand, his Covid-19 publications have received a fair number of citations, so these contributions could become integrated more visibly into the narrative on some level.). We really don't need a fancy syndrome distinction to reflect the response of a person to multiple stressors. You could insert [X] all day in front of "Stress Syndrome" for basically anything. It's stupid.
CDS-afflicted people refuse vaccines, masks, social distancing, etc. They also believe in "conspiracy theories." They need to be broken down for the vaccination agenda.
Right, along with people who think the democrats stole the election or that 9/11 was an inside job and/or involved Israelis.
: Interestingly, he actually started writing the book in 2018 because that year was the centenary of the
Kansas Spanish Flu, which began in 1918. Covid-19 began right at the end of 2019, and it's kind of amusing how close it was to the centenary. There's probably no significance to this, but I thought it was worth pointing out.
: Skeptics refers to those who are critical of the Covid-19 narrative as it has been presented by governments and MSM entities. They usually oppose lockdowns, hastily rolled-out vaccination campaigns, and realize the media distortions and dispute these points accordingly. As with anything else, there is a spectrum, and the skeptics realize that what we know as "Covid-19" is literally just the flu or the common cold.
Believers, of course, are the ones who believe the constantly flip-flopping narrative, "trust science," and get injected with experimental vaccines.