Genus Homo is our own genus, and is distinct from any of the ape genera for a number of reasons. Please show how Homo ergaster falls more closely within one of the ape genera rather than genus Homo.
And please explain how and why you discount the features which have been used to place it within the genus Homo.
I understand your original point, that the ergaster is much lower on the chain than any other fossil of homo erectus. My point is that it’s not homo erectus. It’s similar to the Australopithecus which had unique baboon features and traits. It’s also one of the lesser intact fossils.
The main point is that we’ve found a plethora of clearly ape fossils and clearly human ones and nothing of substance in between (whereas, if evolution had occured, the numbers of each group would be similar, there’d actually, in all probability, be more transition ones than ape and there’d definite be more than just a few deformed,inconclusive ones). Even evolutionists debate the validity of the ergaster classification and many consider it less of an offshoot and more of a decomposed figure of an Australopithecus.