Scott Morrison stands by Liberal ad promoting government's bushfire response

Here's the advertisement itself: https://twitter.com/ScottMorrisonMP/status/1213330419044638722

For the non-Aussies, and for the Aussies who aren't political tragics like me... the reason everyone's up in arms is that this video has been released by the Liberal Party, not by the Australian government. We can tell by the "Authorised by" statement in the final frame. Government information comes with the Commonwealth coat of arms and says "Authorised by the Australian Government, Canberra". Party political advertisements have to be "authorised by" someone within the political party. In other words, this is a political ad, not a government press release. The Liberal Party (not the government!) is promoting itself on the basis of what the government is doing for the bushfires.

Scott Morrison has already been an utter failure during this crisis. He went on holiday after the fires started. He's done as little as possible since he returned. And people have noticed. People have abused him when he turned up to visit their town. People have literally refused to shake his hand (but he grabs their hands and shakes them anyway!).

But, despite all this wrong-footedness, this new advertisement is the most tone-deaf thing he's done (so far!). It reflects his background in marketing. Everything's a message for him. Unfortunately for him, the message here is "I'm using your suffering to promote myself".

Scott Morrison has fucked up yet again.

Today's political climate has all sorts of terms being thrown around with varying meanings and history behind them. There are Liberals (political ideology for FREEDUM), and Liberals (foreign policy), and Liberals (economic policy), and Liberals ("conservatives"), and Liberals ("centrist, anti-absolute monarchists"), and Liberals ("democrats"), and Liberals (some other field that annoys the shit out of me). There are Progressives, and Conservatives, Nationalists, Socialists, Social Democrats, unreconstructed Monarchists, Reconstructed Monarchists, Anarchists, and I'm sure some other political identity that I've missed.

So, given the rather long list of ways to identify politically, and the just about as long history for those ways to identify politically, I thought we should have a discussion focused exclusively on the political history of the terms we used.

So, the questions:

1. What terms do you commonly use to describe yourself and others in your political environment? 
2. What is the relevant history that informs the way you use common political terms to describe yourself and others?
3. Got any links, movies, books, etc., that delve into that history?

This has the potential to get hairy because of how broad it is, so I'm going to try to remind people of some best practices that I use when engaging in meaningful discussion:

• Understand before criticizing. - Be able to frame someone's view in a way that they can agree with themselves before critiquing their view. Questions are your friend, but make sure the questions are focused on better understanding someone's view, not on biasing reactions to a view.
• Assume good faith. - Calling people "trolls" makes me very angry. Don't do it. For any reason. To anyone. If your case is so bulletproof that you'd be willing to call someone out for it here, take it to @Deimos instead. I don't want to read it here.
• I Could Be Wrong - There is nothing wrong with having confidence in your view, but there should be some part of you that recognizes you can be wrong about whatever claim you make. Nothing is 100%. Absolutely Only Sith Deal In Absolutes, etc.