I've never been convinced that per capita was a sufficient metric on it's own. I've been following the country numbers (globally) for the last year and the trendlines have been similar almost across the globe with few exceptions:
To me this says the tolerance for local deaths rates -> lockdowns doesn't seem to be per capita but "bad enough" compared to other countries around them, or just hospital tolerance in general. With some exceptions like Brazil who ignore the international reputation or Peru who doesn't have the financial (or more likely leadership) capability to make a difference.
My feeling was more that it related to how independent the media was, and how powerful the opposition is. The UK is going through a sort of low point on both counts, so there wasn't really anybody to make a fuss (aside from the occasional scientist).
In countries like India, where the per-capita death rate is a tiny fraction of the UK's, the media creates a sense of pandemonium. Of course, it is pandemonium in India at the moment - but it was also pandemonium in the UK when NHS staff were wearing bin bags, except, in the UK, the PM is married to the ex of the most powerful newspaper editor, the opposition is on holiday, and everybody is anxious to avoid asking any awkward questions (aside from, amusingly, Dominic Cummings).
It was the weirdest thing - I'm english, so I was watching the UK news, while also watching the graph of cases/deaths on a daily basis (my mum was in a high risk group). I was literally sending them emails of the statistical risk of dying of covid vs other dangerous things, because the media set this tone of complete normalacy, when it was actually a very high risk enviroment. It led to basically nobody wearing masks, for instance.
Madk usage has been very very high in the UK, and the risk of dying from covid has never been high, it has always been the aggregate effect on medical infrastructure causing a collapse in treatment availability, nit just limited to covid treatment, that has been the danger.
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/bda759474...
To me this says the tolerance for local deaths rates -> lockdowns doesn't seem to be per capita but "bad enough" compared to other countries around them, or just hospital tolerance in general. With some exceptions like Brazil who ignore the international reputation or Peru who doesn't have the financial (or more likely leadership) capability to make a difference.