Woods is a former neoconservative and has been critical of neoconservative support for an aggressive and interventionist foreign policy.
In place of this, he has advocated non-intervention.

Woods makes a sharp distinction between paleoconservative thinkers, with whom he sympathizes, and neoconservative thinkers.
In articles, lectures and interviews Woods traces the intellectual and political distinction between the older conservative, or paleoconservative, school of thought and the neoconservative school of thought.

These views have provoked a strong response from some conservatives.
On the release of Woods' Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, the book was scathingly reviewed by Max Boot of The Weekly Standard.
Boot accused Woods of being overly sympathetic with Southerners such as John C. Calhoun for his thoughts on a state's right to secede and state nullification (though northern politicians also advocated for nullification), while exaggerating the militarism of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, and Bill Clinton.
James Haley's Weekly Standard review of the book, in contrast, stated that it "provides a compelling rebuttal to the liberal sentiment encrusted upon current history texts..." the book is "ultimately about truth" and "[t]his is a book everyone interested in American history should have in his library".
 Woods concluded his reply to Boot's review by saying "[s]ince in my judgment Max Boot embodies everything that is wrong with modern conservatism, his opposition is about the best endorsement I could have asked for".
Woods is a former neoconservative and has been critical of neoconservative support for an aggressive and interventionist foreign policy. In place of this, he has advocated non-intervention.
Woods makes a sharp distinction between paleoconservative thinkers, with whom he sympathizes, and neoconservative thinkers. In articles, lectures and interviews Woods traces the intellectual and political distinction between the older conservative, or paleoconservative, school of thought and the neoconservative school of thought.
These views have provoked a strong response from some conservatives. On the release of Woods' Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, the book was scathingly reviewed by Max Boot of The Weekly Standard. Boot accused Woods of being overly sympathetic with Southerners such as John C. Calhoun for his thoughts on a state's right to secede and state nullification (though northern politicians also advocated for nullification), while exaggerating the militarism of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, and Bill Clinton. James Haley's Weekly Standard review of the book, in contrast, stated that it "provides a compelling rebuttal to the liberal sentiment encrusted upon current history texts..." the book is "ultimately about truth" and "[t]his is a book everyone interested in American history should have in his library".  Woods concluded his reply to Boot's review by saying "[s]ince in my judgment Max Boot embodies everything that is wrong with modern conservatism, his opposition is about the best endorsement I could have asked for".
Thomas Woods