Mill begins “On Liberty” by asserting the principle that we should never regulate the actions of others unless those actions harm others. He goes on to suggest that we should not restrict speech, even if we find it wrong. What seems strange is that Mill is a utilitarian, meaning that the right or wrong of a policy or action depends on its consequences. Obviously, some speech does a huge amount of harm and not a lot of good, so how can Mill argue that we should never censor? (Your answer should include Mill's discussion of why censorship "steals from the human race" and you should cover both cases when the minority opinion is false and when it is false.