To those who might not know, and want to ernestly learn: This graphic is technically correct. From a legitimacy standpoint the DPRK is the better one. Let me explain: [...] https://twitter.com/historic_ly/status/1352768567935180806

After the 2WW, after the Japanese left Korea, the peninsula was left to it's own for a bit before Soviets and Americans swooped in. In this time the People's Republic of Korea existed. The people's committees that popped up around the country began take up governance slowly [..]

These people's committees espoused more or less socialist sympathies, with radically being anti-japan, wokring to get rid of collaborateurs and attempting land reforms where possible. [...]

In the north where the soviets now controlled the land they cooperated with the people's committees. That held until negotiations for reunification broke down completely and the north was, with consent of the committees, reorganized into the DPRK. [...]

In the south the americans started to crack down on the committeeds not long after they arrived. The Military governor banned the PRK and the committees , declaring that: "one of our missions was to break down this Communist government". [...]

Without the US brutally cracking down on these popular people's committees, without them refusing a neutral reunification, Korea would today have a unified popular government build on their own accords. [...]

And no matter what you beliefs are, it is evident that today the DPRK is more of a continuation of the PRK and the people's committees than the RoK could ever be.

And that is just the easy stuff from wikipedia mind you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_Korea