It's not really possible to have a fully "intellectually honest" debate on topics such as this - and it's a complete waste of time.
Yes it is certainly possible. I do it all the time with educated conservatives.
We're not discussing simple topics like who's pig is going to win the race at the local fair, but great big global topics where there are people who's sole job is to understand the topic.
This is exactly why we need to be intellectually honest.
All we have to debate with is third-hand accounts of what happened that may or may not be inaccurate and missing key details.
This is also false. You yourself cited that Snopes article that uses scientific data to support it's claim that far-right violence has been more damaging that far-left violence.
Scientific data is in no way "third-hand".
Video evidence is also not "third-hand", which is a very good thing as it's increasingly more available. For example, I wouldn't have been able to disprove that other poster's claim that the white supremacist who ran over 20 protesters did so out of fear without video evidence.
It's third-hand, but the volume of it is so overwhelming that we end up picking and choosing what we know and accept based on our opinion, so we now are trying to have a debate when only having about half the facts.
What are the other facts you want to bring up? I don't feel overwhelmed at all. You have only brought up one piece of evidence in this whole discussion.
The end result is not a benifical debate where a conclusion is reached and action is taken on that conclusion
what do you think a beneficial debate would look like?
One where everyone just says what they feel is true without anything to back it up?
Conclusions should be drawn from evidence (i.e. from studying the real world), not the other way around. This is how I have come to my conclusions which is why I can back everything up with evidence.
leading to zero benefit to ever admit you are wrong and infinite incentive to find a way to explain that you are still right.
I would certainly concede to being wrong. I am concerned with truth, not being right.
For example, I used to think Antifa were just as bad as the far right extremists, but I did my homework and realized that that is not the case.
Almost everything I believe to be true about the world came about from recognizing that I was wrong about an unfounded belief I previously had.