This is such a poor thought process, and a strawman to boot. I never made any claims about causality between them. I pointed out you can't defend "stakeholder as dehumanizing" by claiming it's more specific and the example I used to demonstrate this was that "resource" is more specific than 'people', yet 'resource' is considered dehumanizing whereas 'people' is not.
I'm not even going to bother answer your question.
you're using stakeholder to mean "anyone in any way involved", much the way resource means "anyone I manage". That is not what that word means in agile vernacular. When you mean that, just say people.
I've seen several people recently using it this way. Fast forward 5-10 years and people will be bitching about stakeholder being dehumanizing just like they do resource.
Your usage is akin to calling a garbage truck driver a stakeholder in the city wide trash system. That's not how that word was meant to be used.