So first off - let's get some perspective here, because you keep saying "not effective".

Australia has a population of 25M people.
From 29M tests, they've found 44K cases. So that's 0.17% of the population (infected). This works out to 1,700 per million.
There have been 981 deaths attributed to COVID19 - that's 2.2% of confirmed cases, or 0.004% of the population. This works out to 40 per million (of the population).
There are currently 603 people hospitalised due to COVID19 - that's 0.002% of the population. This works out to 20 per million.

And this is with quite limited vaccination rollout, due to a variety of factors.

Lets compare that with the US, which has had a variety of measures in place.

The US has a population of 331M people.
From 511M tests, they've found 37M cases. So that's 11.18% of the population (infected). This works out to 111,800 per million.
There have been 625,375 deaths attributed to COVID19 - that's 1.7% of confirmed cases, or 0.19% of the population. This works out to 1,900 per million (of the population).
It's hard to find a specific number from CDC but it seems like a recent # for US current hospitalisations is 89K. So that's 0.026% of the population. This works out to 260 per million.

So. Do you want to tell me again how "Lockdowns don't work" and "Even Australia failed them now"?

Or would you prefer I collect the stats from Thailand (where I live currently) - we were doing amazingly well until last December. We made Australia's numbers, look high by comparison. Then, after some localised outbreaks, the government decided letting people roam the country unrestricted during a pandemic was fine. That was ~4 months ago. At the moment, Thailand's new cases per day, are about half of Australia's total cases over the last 18 months.

But sure. Vastly reducing travel doesn't work at all to curb the spread of a highly infectious disease.

Give me a fucking break. You can argue your "freedom" is more important - I won't agree with you, but at least your argument makes some sense from a certain view point. But right now you're just ignoring the facts and making up claims to suit your own narrative/goals.

As for your whole Afghan/Gays/HIV side show:

Last time I checked, there's no vaccine against HIV, but you also can't catch it just by being in close proximity to someone who is infected.
Some places (and I thought this included the US but I don't actually know for sure) criminalise knowingly infecting someone with HIV. Would you prefer that approach?

Anyway - the point is - there literally are multiple vaccines against COVID19, and the evidence supports that the vaccinated are at much lower risk of infection, and much lower risk of hospitalisation/death in the case they do get infected. Pretty much every country on earth that is both enforcing 'lock downs' and conducting vaccinations, have said that they intend to reduce the spread via curfews/lockdowns until a sufficient number (typically 70%) of the population are vaccinated. It's not going to go away just because people are vaccinated - but the rate and prevalence of spread will reduce greatly, and the rate of hospitalisation and death will reduce greatly. That's the whole point.

Now your other point was, to "increase hospital capacity". How many hospitals/expansions that will be suitable for use both in summer and winter, do you suppose could have been built in the ~12 months from the start of the pandemic until vaccinations started rolling out? Or in the ~18 months until now?