The historical ignorance around Covid and other pandemics, and the way people act as though it was some unprecedented event that justifies the unprecedented reaction, is really stunning.
Quarantines and lockdowns were used against previous pandemics such as the 1918 flu pandemic.
American Samoa, for instance, was entirely unscathed by the Spanish flu because they instituted a strict quarantine at the border, the same policy Australia/NZ did for Covid-19.
See this pre-covid article from 2018, for instance.[0] Sound familiar?
> “These communities basically shut themselves down,” explains Howard Markel, an epidemiological historian at the University of Michigan who was one of the authors of the study. “No one came in and no one came out. Schools were closed and there were no public gatherings. We came up with the term ‘protective sequestration’, where a defined and healthy group of people are shielded from the risk of infection from outsiders.”
One might perhaps imagine that those concerned with the lessons of history would not overlook the lack of precedent for a pandemic taking place in a time of ubiquitous and nigh instantaneous global travel. Such a one would be disappointed in this case, certainly, but the expectation could be considered reasonable nonetheless.
No, this doesn't actually make the definitive difference you think it does. Many earlier pandemics had no problem spreading throughout the almost entire world in relatively short order.
Sounds just like this was taken from a dystopian novel.