The Urban Legend

The Roots of Today’s Urban Divide: Settler Colonialism and the Legacy of Colonial Cities

Across North America and former British colonies, urban landscapes retain deep-rooted legacies of settler colonialism. Unlike extractive colonialism, which involved exploiting resources and labor before retreating to the homeland, settler colonialism intended to displace Indigenous populations permanently, recreating European society on new territory. This brand of colonization left not only social and political scars but also indelible spatial ones. The structure, layout, and social hierarchy of cities developed within settler colonies all served to enforce racial divisions, economic domination, and the erasure of Indigenous people.

Through a blend of economic imperatives, legal frameworks, and cultural narratives, settler colonialism etched inequalities into urban spaces—inequalities that remain evident in today’s cityscapes, housing policies, and social divisions.

Settler Colonialism: A Framework for Displacement and Replacement

Settler colonialism is driven by what historian Patrick Wolfe describes as the “logic of elimination,” which doesn’t always mean outright genocide but seeks to eliminate Indigenous presence on land to make way for settlers. Settler societies established not only physical control but also a cultural narrative that framed their presence as morally and civilizationally superior. This framework created cities with layouts designed to exclude or assimilate Indigenous people. For settlers, cities were not just hubs for economic activity—they were symbols of European order and progress. 

John Winthrop’s 1630 reference to Plymouth as a “city upon a hill” underscores this mentality: settlers saw their cities as models of moral enlightenment, cities that existed as stark contrasts to the Indigenous “wilderness” they sought to replace. These urban centers became nodes of settler identity and power, in which territorial, cultural, and racial control were inseparable.

Building Settler Cities: Layouts Rooted in Segregation

Settler colonial cities were often planned with both economic exploitation and racial division in mind. Positioned strategically along coastlines or riverbanks, cities like Philadelphia, Boston, and Victoria, British Columbia, functioned as gateways for transporting goods, connecting their colonial hinterlands with Britain. Early city layouts prioritized European-style squares, commercial centers, and neighborhoods modeled after European ideals, with Indigenous and non-European spaces designated as “native quarters,” informal settlements, or simply outside the official bounds of the city.

These urban zones embodied a strict racial hierarchy, intentionally embedding divisions into the cityscape. European neighborhoods were characterized by spacious planning, often with classical architecture and public squares symbolizing European ideals of order and civilization. In contrast, Indigenous neighborhoods were segregated and deprived of the infrastructure, services, and aesthetics afforded to European areas. This racialization of space served to legitimize European claims to “civilized” city centers, reinforcing the narrative that only settlers could bring order to these urban environments.

Racial Capitalism: The Economic Logic of Settler Colonialism

Embedded in settler colonialism is the economic principle of racial capitalism, which assigns value and opportunity based on race and justifies dispossession on economic grounds. Racial capitalism, as defined by scholar Cedric Robinson, sees race as a tool for classifying and devaluing people, legitimizing settler claims to Indigenous land. In settler cities, this logic led to the establishment of laws and practices that enforced racial hierarchies within the economy and land ownership. The doctrine of preemption, for example, granted settlers the exclusive right to purchase Indigenous lands, but often under coercive conditions that rendered these sales virtually non-consensual.

This economic framework not only dispossessed Indigenous populations but also marginalized them from the burgeoning economy that settler cities created. Indigenous groups were pushed to the peripheries of economic activity and denied opportunities to participate fully in urban life. Meanwhile, the settlers’ racialized control over land and labor allowed them to build wealth within their communities, establishing a pattern of economic inequality that has endured across generations.

Controlling the Indigenous “Other” and the Urban Narrative

Settler cities cast Indigenous populations as incompatible with the vision of a modern, orderly urban space. By depicting Indigenous communities as chaotic, “other,” or morally suspect, settlers justified their exclusion from city centers. This perspective manifested in city policies and legal codes that regulated Indigenous presence, labeling them as “vagrants,” “nuisances,” or “threats” to property values and urban order. These attitudes and policies weren’t merely symbolic; they shaped real spatial and economic restrictions on where Indigenous people could live, work, and participate in urban life.

In many cases, Indigenous individuals and communities were physically removed from settler cities, relegated to rural reserves. In the eyes of settlers, cities were no place for “primitive” populations, whose presence would disrupt the “civilized” image they wished to project. Even as Indigenous populations were relocated to designated areas, settler cities continued to evolve as spaces symbolizing European progress, development, and superiority.

The Lasting Impacts of Settler Colonialism in Today’s Cities

The spatial organization, exclusionary policies, and racial hierarchies established by settler colonialism still resonate in today’s cities. Modern urban segregation, particularly in the United States, continues to reflect colonial-era attitudes, where racialized and low-income neighborhoods are often stigmatized and targeted for “revitalization” or gentrification. Redlining practices that prevented Black and Indigenous communities from purchasing homes in certain neighborhoods throughout the 20th century are a direct legacy of settler colonial ideologies. These practices locked generations out of wealth-building opportunities and systematically funneled resources toward predominantly white neighborhoods, establishing a racial wealth gap that continues to widen.

Today, policies surrounding social housing, zoning, and redevelopment are framed in terms of “diversity” and “social mixing.” However, these initiatives often function as cover for removing low-income and racialized communities from valuable urban areas under the guise of neighborhood improvement. By forcing low-income residents to leave areas targeted for “revitalization,” these policies reinforce settler colonial patterns of displacement and replacement, privileging middle- and upper-class, often white, residents.

A Path Forward: Decolonizing Urban Planning

Urban planning today is increasingly aware of the need to address historical injustices, yet it often avoids directly confronting the colonial foundations of our cities. Scholars argue that true decolonization requires more than inclusive language—it demands a reckoning with the spatial, economic, and social structures embedded in cities through settler colonialism. By revisiting policies like land use, housing, and public space allocation, planners can begin to address the racial and colonial dynamics still ingrained in urban spaces.

Initiatives to involve Indigenous communities in urban decision-making and land reclamation offer one way forward. Recognizing the cultural, historical, and economic contributions of Indigenous peoples challenges the narrative of settler cities as solely products of European progress. Projects that restore Indigenous land rights or allow Indigenous groups to shape the development of their neighborhoods directly address the dispossession and exclusion built into the settler colonial model.

Reimagining Belonging and Ownership in the Settler City

Settler cities rely on a narrow conception of “belonging,” rooted in colonial narratives of control and hierarchy. Today, concepts of “belonging” and “right to the city” extend beyond property ownership, raising ethical questions about how cities can accommodate diverse populations equitably. This redefinition challenges traditional urban planning that has, for centuries, centered on serving the interests of wealthier, predominantly white residents.

Acknowledging Indigenous land rights and histories represents a critical step toward creating cities that reflect and serve the diversity of their inhabitants. By recognizing the colonial conditions that continue to shape our cities, planners and policymakers have the opportunity to dismantle the divisions and inequalities that settler colonialism embedded into urban spaces. It is a process of reimagining the city not as a testament to colonial progress but as a shared space for all people to thrive.

Cover image – some rights reserved, Flickr Creative Commons, Colonial San Juan