refuting an erroneous description

I am reposting my comment (with some additions) on a facebook discussion board refuting an article that described the word Maharlika according to Paul Morrow. It merely reflected his lack of grasp as to the inherent local culture that only locals could comprehend more than what he was merely taught of. Definitely for the sake of ethics he should not impose his foreign viewpoints to innate local perspectives as it will only expose its limitation. Here is his attempted portrayal:

Maharlika – Members of the Tagalog warrior class known as maharlika had the same rights and responsibilities as the timawa, but in times of war they were bound to serve their datu in battle. They had to arm themselves at their own expense, but they did get to keep the loot they won – or stole, depending on which side of the transaction you want to look at. Although they were partly related to the nobility, the maharlikas were technically less free than the timawas because they could not leave a datu’s service without first hosting a large public feast and paying the datu between 6 and 18 pesos in gold – a large sum in those days.

However, I strongly believe his viewpoints that attempted to portray the Maharlikan were ridiculously erroneous:

"I believe the description of Maharlika in this article is inaccurate,
most likely a foreigner, the writer merely attempts to tailor fit his
pespective about the ancient social system of the Nation by relating it
with some kind of 20th century western capitalist society. Even in
ancient Japan, unlike the present 20th century society, warriors were
definitely of higher rank than merchants, who were even considered less
than their peasant subjects.

To portray the Maharlikan as "less free" than the Timawa is an utter contradiction as the Maharlikan warrior fights for his freedom and for his people. His gesture of respect for the Maginoo was to keep pace with the social order, the fact that the Maharlikan armed himself at his expense proved his sense of noble independence and not necessarily bounded to a master, although, just as the rest of the community he honored higher ranks or the elderly with respect (hence the word "opo, po"), and vice versa.

The subjective portrayal of the Maharlikan bounded to "pay" or host a
large feast seems the foreign writer being unaware of the unwritten code of ethics on generosity of our ancestors and our culture, for even in the present a Pinoy traveler is expected to bring in some "pasalubong," or may even race with each other as who pays first for his/her companion on a jeepney ride.

The modern Maharlikan pledges allegiance to no one but for for HUMANITY and for FREEDOM."

( image courtesy of http://pagodkanaba.blogspot.com )