You're not arguing that Maryland is some socialist Utopia, are you? If you mean Orwellian socialist, I might give it to you.
They have more prohibitory laws on the books than any other state in the union, including all their stupid booze laws.
No. Not saying it's a Utopia at all. I would think our modern history has showed us that there is no Utopian socialist state. You see no menace in the "to each according to his contribution" part there? That rang alarm bells in 1890 with people who actually felt and cared about the world, and has ever since.
As for the DLC, though, I don't see it as too prohibitive. It's a money grab, pure and simple. They even admit to this. It's also worth noting that 32 states have a DLC. 18 of those 32 do what Maryland does, the remainder operate behind the scenes and control the issue of licenses, which, in all cases, are limited. All of those 32 states have an equally prohibitive control over booze. You may just not always notice it because only 18 of those 32 states have created a monopoly (in that hard liquor is only available through government outlets). Also worth noting is that, in Maryland, only Montgomery County does this. The DLC is the brainchild of the county government, though it is using state laws.
MoCo's DLC spearheaded the "direct sale" aspect in the 1950s. MoCo is, essentially, an extension of the state licensing board. The goal was to create a government monopoly on the sale of hard liquor so that the revenue, generated by the community, could be returned to the community. The intent was for proceeds to go to public works and social programs. Thus..."socialism," in a loosely defined way. If it were fascism, then liquor would be banned entirely and not available (temperance often walked hand-in-hand with fascist governments... The Nazis curtailed drinking and created prohibitive laws, and had more regulations against the tobacco industry than we do today).