On the contrary, the (legal and moral) blockade had an effect. If anything, it didn't have ENOUGH of an effect, else all the tens of thousands of rockets which have attacked Israel's civilian non-combatant population ceaselessly for 20 years and the unspeakable October 7 attack could not have happened.
The reason the blockade did not have enough of an effect is because Israel chose to abandon it's border with Egypt, which permitted the importation of weapons into Gaza. Had Israel maintained its sovereignty over its borders and territorial waters, none of this could have happened. (Thus, not occupied. Even though, as a reminder, you can't occupy your own territory).
It is also proof that when Israel ends the occupation, ceding to its "1967 borders", it does not lead to peace. Rather, it leads to "resistance" in territory you acknowledge to be Israel. That is neither self-defense nor a resistance to occupation, that is an attack on another State.
The responsibility for ALL of this, lies with Gaza, its government, and ultimately, its citizens. When faced with the actuality of having an independent, self-governing, self-determining state, they chose belligerence. They chose to walk across their borders and slaughter innocents. For you to continue to insist that the people of Gaza had no choice but to commit atrocities against the civilian population of another state is to blatantly admit that Gaza is incapable of self-governance and peaceful relations with other states.
Given that you believe that the people of Gaza are incapable of self-governance, what do you think the international community should do with them?