Settlers went largely unnoticed within academia, though it has been somewhat influential among radicals. Historian
David Roediger cited
Settlers in his book
The Wages of Whiteness making it among the few scholarly publications to reference the work. Roediger stated that while he preferred
Ted Allen's works on white identity, criticizing what he felt was the book's "at times 'categorical and transhistorical' dismissal of those defined as white", he had hoped other labor historians would take notice of the book's arguments. Berger described
Settlers as a "
paradigm-setting" book that developed conceptions about
settler colonialism that would later become axiomatic within the field of critical ethnic studies. Some critics praised the book's account of the historical construction of whiteness and class in the United States. Kevin Bruyneel, writing in the book
Settler Memory, described
Settlers as among the first and most comprehensive works aiming to define American whiteness by "its historical foundations in settler life". Writing in
Labour/Le Travail, Fred Burrill acknowledged criticisms of the book over its usage of contingent categories, but otherwise praised the book's "clear articulation" of the development of classes in the United States.
Fredy Perlman, in a footnote to the essay "The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism", described the work as a "sensitive" application of
Mao Zedong Thought to American history; however, Perlman objected to its political prescriptions and argued that
Settlers blatantly aimed to reproduce the same repressive systems described earlier in the work. In return, former Black Panther
Kuwasi Balagoon wrote a response to Perlman's essay from prison calling him a "cheap-shot artist who offered an underhanded review" and praising
Settlers as a historically faithful work, in spite of its Marxism. While largely agreeing with Sakai's analysis, Balagoon opined that grassroots collectives would better serve the oppressed than mass institutions "under the leadership of a communist party".
Weather Underground militant
David Gilbert praised the book's historical content as "revealing and useful", though he expressed disagreement at the book's conclusions, arguing that Sakai had downplayed historical examples that evidenced the possibility for class struggle among white working-class Americans. Both Gilbert and Berger lamented the book's lack of attention to gender, with Gilbert noting that the
women's movement could form a progressive current within the white working class. In the
Monthly Review economist
Michael Yates critiqued Gilbert's review of the book as "too generous", calling Sakai's account of white Americans "preposterous on its face" and "an insult to those whites who have suffered the grossest exploitation and still do". In 2024
Owen Hatherley wrote in
Red Pepper that there was an "online cult" around the book. ==Notes and citations==