We can also compare it to the 1889 "Russian flu" pandemic. It killed about a million people worldwide and in most places there were no significant restrictions on people to control it. There is now circumstantial evidence to indicate that pandemic was not caused by influenza at all, but rather by another coronavirus.
I fail to see how that's evidence of the internet causes people to lock down. Seems more like its evidence that the internet has nothing to do with the lockdown, and other factors control whether societies choose to lock down or not.
Correlation doesn't imply causation, but lack of correlation is pretty strong evidence for lack of causation.
I don't think nradov was disagreeing with you. More that they were providing a counterpoint. If anything the fact we have examples swinging both ways makes the argument that internet !~ lockdown even stronger.
Why guess, we have The spanish flu to compare to. There was no internet then. There was however significant restrictions on people to control it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Responses