Hospitals in my country would have been overrun if not for the government imposed lockdown. Fewer businesses than ever have failed this year due to government aid. Lockdowns have been proven to help stop the spread of the virus. You can be against the government having the power to impose them, or against the economic costs they pertain, but they have been proven all over the world to help slow the spread of the disease.

Florida is also an anomaly. As far as I am aware noone knows why they're doing so well, and they rank the highest by some margin among states who 'do nothing'. If the results in Florida were easily reproduceable the entire world would be following their lead. As it stands though many places have needed to go into lockdown simply because their hospitals would get overrun if they didn't. Governments around the world are using lockdowns only as a very last resort. You can frame it as a grab for power but most administrations are incredibly hesistant to go into lockdown simply because of the economic consequences. In fact the only actual debate being held where I am from is whether the government isn't too hesitant to go into lockdowns, as earlier action could have prevented having to go into a longer lockdown.

I'm sure some states in America haven't seen the best results. 'Going into lockdown' isn't some switch which will automatically stop the pandemic. You can create the most ineffective lockdown possible but that does not mean that effective strategies no longer exist. The facts are that limiting the gathering and movement of groups people reduces the spread of the virus (logically), and that a lockdown is a very effective, if not the only, way stop the gathering and movement of groups of people.