This is a rather convoluted sentence (you can read the entire article [here][1]), but I think it breaks down like this:

* The obvious paradox which makes [the thesis] ... actually serve idealism ...
* the thesis of man’s animal origin
* the thesis thus understood
* [the paradox] has already been pointed out by A. Leroi-Gourhan. 

So the part you've picked out is qualifying the thesis - it is not just any thesis of man's animal origins, it is the particular thesis that is understood because of something in a preceding sentence.

A more direct phrasing might be something like this:

> An obvious paradox in this thesis of man's animal origins makes it actually serve idealism, as already pointed out by A. Leroi-Gourhan. 


  [1]: https://www.marxists.org/archive/seve/works/1974/ch3/3.1.3.htm