You're presenting a moral/ethical defense of alcohol, but that line of reasoning can be detached from eg. financial arguments (alcohol costs society through disruptive or down-right criminal behaviour, disease, lost productivity etc. The income from alcohol taxes certainly don't offset these costs in Sweden, but the taxes and extensive regulation seems to moderate the expensive consequences at least). That line of reasoning can form the basis for an ethical counter-argument as well but that's not necessary to show that there are reasons why a government might want to curtail alcohol consumption. For a govt. that doesn't give a fig about morals or libertarian ethics, the above might be enough.

I also can't help but wonder why alcohol is a no-no from a moral standpoint in the first place. Or are you saying morals developed and enforced by humans exist for no reason and are therefore completely irrational?