Essentially, his thesis is that you must go 'all the way' whatever the cost may be. And I felt, what a fucking loser is this wierdo. I mean, I have read his 'Post office' and it is a kickass piece of literature. But what I realise now is that an incomplete and naive philosophy of self-absorbed nihilism possibly informed his work.
Problem 1: All the way with what?
We see a lot of this kind of inspirational bullshit being shared by people these days - exhorting people to do what they want to do. But the problem is no one these days knows what he/she wants to do. These videos and poems only add to consumerist angst whose only beneficiary is the capitalist power centers and not the social organism called human.("Must do something, don't know what.. running with expensive shoes seems to be working for some as per commercials, let me try that.")
Purposeless souls are angstily drifting from one insecurity to next, never being able to see reality, reflect and choose a fight to fight. This philosophy blinds them from seeing the reality that surrounds them, for them to react to. All it does is, it makes people flay in uncertain directions without impact. This philosophy is a pile of dung excreted by blind narcissism.
Problem 2: Consequence-less hero
What it essentially conveys is that you shouldn't bother about the consequences of your actions. 'Just do it'. So should a pedophile just follow his desires? Where is the virtue now? In restrain or in 'going all the way'. Without a context, these words mean nothing.
Being free to do also means being responsible with that freedom. Freedom is a responsibility.
"...This could mean losing, girlfriends, wives, jobs..."says Bukowski.
Ofcourse. How great it would be to live without responsibility. Sartre would have called out his 'bad faith'. To pursue your goals, if you let your partner do the heavy-lifting in responsibilities of life, is it fair? Does it only hurt you when you 'lose' a girlfriend? Does she not get affected?
This is being narcissist. To relinquish one's responsibility with an excuse of passion for some indeterminate goal. Nobody has ever achieved anything of any consequence by being alone.
Jyotirao Phule changed reality of thousands of marginalised Indians with his wife by his side as an equal. That was a goal worth going 'all the way for' - women right, fight against caste based oppression. He fought the right fights without giving up either responsibility or denying anyone's agency. Why lose anyone when they can be your partner in your goals?
Problem 3: Isolation is not a worthy pursuit by itself
All your intellect, your thoughts, your ideals... are useless unless it reacts with another mind. If your thoughts don't inspire a debate, if your actions don't cause a reaction, if your ideals remain unsaid and untested.. would your existence even matter?
If you are forced in isolation because of your thoughts (probably thoughts against existing power structures? why else would you be made silent?), and you fight against it, that is a fight worth fighting for and isolation worth bearing.
Isolation as a scar cannot be a choice, it is a medal only if it foisted on you by the powers that be for upsets you cause to the power centers. Don't romanticize effect, without appreciation for the cause.