Look how things have changed since even early March. I was at my last in-person tech event at the beginning of March, a few hundred people, and lots of care was being given to not shaking hands and wiping down surfaces but there wasn't so much as a thought of distancing or mask wearing (and who knows how important those things will turn out to be either).
I got a feeling that picking the low hanging fruit in time (i.e. concerts, clubs, packed public transport) is enough to not get a big spike at all. Otherwise most European countries should explode since social distancing is no way taken as serious anymore.
I don't think so. This problem is not monolithic. Response is just one factor but not the only, structural factors are other.
An example on structural factors is the population size. Biggest countries will have a higher absolute mortality (more deaths) than smaller ones for example. Just because they had a bigger pool of people vulnerable.
Small ones, on the other hand, could end having a much higher relative mortality.
Is unclear at this point who types of factors have more weight here, but all the hot spots in the first part of the first wave share several common denominators. All except one, and they are structural ones.
A cursory look suggests most of them actually have been exploding in new cases since mid-july/early-august
But you'd need to study how much correlation on this dimension there is in general worldwide to conclude it's a major factor.
The Atlantic [1] has an interesting article on the role of super-spreaders. It possibly suggests a particular contact tracing approach but it also suggests that, especially early on, there was probably a great deal of randomness in how events unfolded in a particular place. I can't speak to the medicine but it has certainly seemed as if a lot of outcomes have been pretty random. (With some exceptions like nursing home deaths that were just bad policies.)
[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overloo...