Christoffer Tigerstedt: There is no alcohol policy anymore … Extensive changes in Finnish alcohol legislation in the 1990s have altered the framework for policy-making. Macropolitics, based on regulation of physical and economic availability, is challenged by various community and communicating approaches, focusing on the capacities of the consumer. However, the new governing rationale is not a baby of the 1990s, but can be traced back to the appearance of the new public health movement (NPH) in the 1960s and 1970s. The NPH was a reaction against individually oriented health policy. Social and environmental aspects were emphasised. Illness and bad health were reconceptualised into risks operating on a community or population level. On the one hand individuals were abstract parts of large aggregates, on the other hand their ability and responsibility to control their own lives was stressed. The focus on the rights of the consumer makes it possible to regard the NPH as a liberal rationality of rule. Although “Alcohol control policies in public health perspective” (Bruun et al. 1975) was not a liberal manifest, it introduced a new risk approach that ideologically and politically was likely to liberate individual consumers from (stigmatising) public control. This paradox is found in several writings by Kettil Bruun, who maintained both restrictive and liberal ideas with regard to alcohol control. A crucial distinction, used by Bruun, was that between measures directed at whole populations (universalism) and measures directed at individuals (individualism). This distinction loses some of its power when alcohol issues have become normalised, alcohol consumers are expected to conduct self-control, and restrictions on physical and economic control are weakened. New modes of control are developed, engaging individual consumers in community-based policy strategies.