說別人歧視 (but without proofs) 已經是出於歧視或是歧視行為。(美國黑人最愛玩這科。隨時有錢落袋。)

美國黑人叫美國黑人做"力加"，不會有美國黑人會話"歧視"。但其他人一說"力加"，便立即被人話"歧視"。這就是歧視行為。

在非洲，不同種族的黑人一直互相歧視，但美國黑人不會主動覺得有責任化解非洲種族歧視問題。這就是另一種歧視。

美國黑人就是把「歧視」的含義無限延伸。"美國黑人怎樣互相稱呼，當然不是種族歧視" is a false statement, as 不同的美國黑人 may be of a different 種族 (in finer details)。[Example: what if a 美國黑人 calls 非洲黑人做"力加" or won't give a job to a 非洲黑人 because of his "種族"?]

"後半部都當成歧視就更荒謬" -> Actually, that's "階級 / 身份歧視"。

法律僅是一個工具, subject to timeline, interpretation and debate。Actual determination of 歧視 should be based on 良知。

1. 法律上針對歧視的法例，祇是佔"所有種類的歧視"的一部份。

未入籍的「非洲黑人」 (or 黑人 from other places, but has green card) 算不算「美國黑人」? 無三粒星的, 算不算「港人」 ?

從前，香港的上海人祇聘用上海人 or 廣府人聘用廣府人。假如發生在今天, 這算不算歧視 (even though the law isn't binding in such fine subdivision) ?

"一個白人不聘請黑人也不一定是基於歧視"... that is exactly the situation that raises concerns even when it is true. In reality, if & when that happens in US, many 「美國黑人」 (or people from any minority groups) would file lawsuit against that 白人, and claim that the hiring decision was based on "歧視", rather than suitability of that 黑人 for the job. Then the 白人 would have to waste a lot of time and money to defend himself, causing an unfair dilemma to the 白人 -> hiring an unsuitable candidate? avoiding lawsuit? Of course, the 「美國黑人」 would say that the court of law would prove if the 白人 is really innocent.

So when that situation happens, very often the 白人 would & must hire someone from a racial-minority group, or another 黑人, to avoid any lawsuit. Hiring another 白人 for the same job would be suicidal. Thus a suitable 白人 candidate for the job would have been racially discriminated against that job.

2. 「美國黑人」 claims that they are/were racially discriminated due to their skin color and because of US's long slavery history and human-right movement. My point is that 「美國黑人」 easily claims that they are racially discriminated, but at the same time, some of them racially (or 階級/身份) 歧視黑人 from other places in the world (such as by turning blind eyes to racial extermination, etc. in their "motherland"... [ha.ha.ha..]). & Some will jump on any opportunity to yell "discrimination" loudly for any personal gain.

{From personal [bad] experience with some 「美國黑人」 ... I would really avoid them up front ... }

[Of course, there must still be many 「美國黑人」 who are good and kind..... but... my personal preference is ... hopefully not classified as 歧視. ]

3. I totally agree with you that "法律不可能完全解決問題". As a matter of fact, sometimes it is the source of problems.

Officially, 綠卡 is [公民 less 選舉權]. But with only 綠卡, one may still be kicked out of the country (such as illegal activities, not living in the country as primary residence, etc.).

[And there are people who have nothing but work visas !! They are the ones who receive most harassment and discrimination, as they have even lesser protection, as they need their jobs and their bosses' help to renew the visas until they successfully acquire 綠卡.]

三粒星 is equivalent to full 公民 status, i.e. no one may kick you out of HK.

"從前，香港的上海人祇聘用上海人 or 廣府人聘用廣府人" was not because of language capability, but personal preference and sense of security, etc. (上海人 didn't trust 廣府人, vice versa.)

Thus if it happens nowadays, it would be under 平等機會條例, rather than 歧視條例 even though it is actually a 籍貫歧視。

-- Good Night !