If we hope to do something serious to avert nuclear catastrophe, we must be willing to face certain additional questions. We must inquire into the domestic factors that drive the Pentagon system. Repeatedly, US planners have turned to military Keynesianism as a device of economic management. The Pentagon system has come to serve as the state sector of the economy, offering a guaranteed market for high technology production, subsidizing industrial research, and in general, serving as a system of industrial policy planning. In fact, every advanced industrial economy has a substantial component of state coordination and planning, and as a number of commentators have observed, the Pentagon system in the US is rather similar in its functioning to such agencies as the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) in Japan. There is, however, a crucial difference, since MITI is oriented towards commercial sales whereas our system of state planning is oriented toward military production, in effect, the production of high technology waste.