Right now, I think there's just a lot of disagreement over what the current goal should be, but it's a conversation that's either not taking place at all, or it's taking place in a very diagonal manner.
On one hand, there's a group of people who are arguing, in essence, that the emergency phase of the pandemic is either over or nearly over, and the goal should be how we live with covid as an endemic disease, like influenza. Those people tend to downplay the importance of NPIs because they view them as not sustainable and/or excessively costly relative to whatever benefits they provide. These people don't worry much, relatively speaking, about case counts when those cases involve people recuperating at home. (Obviously I'm painting with a pretty broad brush, but I want to try to state this position charitably).
On the other hand, there's a group of people who are arguing, in essence, that our goal should be eradicating covid-19, the same way that we eradicated smallpox and polio. These folks tend to emphasize NPIs as essential complements to vaccination as part of a multipronged effort to control spread, with the long-run goal of getting cases down to zero. These people worry relatively more about case counts. (Again, broad brush, charity, etc.)
For the sake of completeness, I should add that there's a third camp that thinks that covid-19 isn't real, or was always just a flu, or that we should really be watching out for hippos instead, or whatever the argument is these days. These folks were going maskless at their local Home Depot back in 2020 and they use terms like "pureblood" unironically today. They never worried about case counts. (A little less charity here).
So basically it's "zero covid" vs. "vaxxed and relaxed" vs. "MAGA." These camps don't share the same end goals.