is your basis for declaring that real poets live a "more simple and 'quiet' debauched lifestyle of writing poetry" as if it were a qualification? I find that to be quite absurd, even the prospect of placing defining lines on what is and is not "real" or "pure" poetry. Anyone who picks up a pen and puts down in ink their thoughts and feelings, their emotions, and tosses them out for a world at large to comb through and embrace or reject is as real a poet as any, in my opinion.
Also, it takes an enormous amount of ego for anyone to harbor the belief that others would be interested in reading their manifestos, as well as a desire for attention for either themselves or their work that motivates a writer to publish. Without ego and the need to be recognized, nothing written in the dark of solitude would ever see the light of day.
Have you ever read any of Jim Morrison's poetry, or listened to his lyrics? The lyrics alone are a good example of even his technical poetic ability. The fact that you need to invoke Corso and McKenna to support your views on what is clearly a matter of opinion suggests to me that you lack the proper familiarity to make such a statement yourself.